Contents

Utilities Industry
The Practical Guide to Surface Science (2026)

D54c15105cfe94f786c500e4091d6ea65457608fde49ba183c8f862814a54249?s=100&d=m
Written by
Dr Amit Pratap Singh
PhD, Delhi University Post Doc - AIST Japan
Guest Author
Read More
alidad
Reviewed by
Dr Alidad Amirfazli
Dr. Amirfazli, a leading expert in surface wetting and superhydrophobic coatings, has 250+ publications, edits Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, and has received multiple research awards.
Scientific Advisor & Co-founder
Read More
D54c15105cfe94f786c500e4091d6ea65457608fde49ba183c8f862814a54249?s=100&d=m
Written By

Dr Amit Pratap Singh

Guest Author

PhD, Delhi University

Post Doc - AIST Japan

alidad
Reviewed By

Dr Alidad Amirfazli

Scientific Advisor & Co-founder

Dr. Amirfazli, a leading expert in surface wetting and superhydrophobic coatings, has 250+ publications, edits Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, and has received multiple research awards.

Featured Studies & Publications

Research Paper Contact angle measurement with a smartphone
Research Paper Surface tension measurement with a smartphone using a pendant drop

This is a practical guide to Surface Science for researchers working in the Utilities Industry.

In this all-new guide you’ll learn all about:

  • Crucial surface science principles
  • The significance of surface science measurements for the Utilities industry
  • Applicable ASTM Standards & Guidelines

Let’s dive right in.

Energy, Electricity & Lighting

Contents

measurement

Contact Angle Measurement

tension

Surface Tension Measurement

energy

Surface Energy Measurement

sliding angle

Sliding Angle Measurement

realworld

Real World Applications

standardand guide

Standards and Guidelines

Executive Summary

What it covers: How power and water utilities use contact angle, interfacial tension and sliding angle on insulators, insulating oil, membranes and coatings. Each topic links to a use case, a standard or a published client study.
Key insights: Silicone insulators work in wet, polluted conditions only while their surface repels water, and contact angle puts a number on that. Oil to water interfacial tension falls as insulating oil ages, so a pendant drop screen can flag samples for full lab analysis.
Business value: A numeric wetting check catches insulator, oil and membrane problems between scheduled lab tests. One portable kit covers contact angle, interfacial tension and sliding angle, so the same team can check samples in the lab or near the asset.
Standards to follow: IEC TS 62073 describes three ways to assess insulator hydrophobicity: contact angle, surface tension and the spray method. ASTM D2285 covered oil to water interfacial tension by the drop weight method and was withdrawn in 2008. The Dropometer measures the same property by pendant drop, which is a different method.
Bottom line: Use contact angle to track insulator and membrane surfaces, and interfacial tension to trend insulating oil. Keep your reference lab methods for reported results, then book a 15 minute demo to try a screen on your own samples.

Chapter 1: Introduction

In utilities, many failures start at a surface that has stopped doing its job. A silicone insulator that no longer sheds water lets leakage current build up. Insulating oil that has aged lowers its interfacial tension long before a fault. A fouled membrane loses flux and needs more cleaning.

These are the places where wetting decides yield in utilities work:

The Dropometer drop shape analysis kit measures contact angle, surface and interfacial tension, surface free energy and sliding angle with one portable setup. Its method was validated against a KRUSS DSA100E in two peer reviewed papers. If you are new to the terms, start with wettability.

We use the following surface properties to understand the behavior of Utilities products and improve their quality.

Chapter 2: Contact Angle Measurement

The contact angle quantifies the wettability of a surface by representing the angle between a liquid’s surface and a solid surface.
Dropletlab Research

Sample Image taken from Droplet Lab Tensiometer.

Young – Laplace Method

  • 1. This method uses the whole drop profile to calculate the contact angle value.
  • 2. This method is only compatible with an axisymmetric drop, which is not always seen in practice because a needle is typically inserted into the drop to increase or decrease the drop volume.
  • 3. This method yields more consistent results than the polynomial fitting method.

Polynomial Method

  • 1. This method uses only a portion of the drop profile to calculate the contact angle value.
  • 2. This method is compatible with both axisymmetric and non-axisymmetric drops.
  • 3. The measurement results of this method are less consistent, as they can be influenced by local surface imperfections.
Dynamic Contact Angle

Ideally, when we place a drop on a solid surface, a unique angle exists between the liquid and the solid surface. We can calculate the value of this ideal contact angle (the so-called Young’s contact angle) using Young’s equation. In practice, due to surface geometry, roughness, heterogeneity, contamination, and deformation, the contact angle value on a surface is not necessarily a single consistent value but rather falls within a range. The upper and lower limits of this range are known as the advancing and receding contact angles, respectively. The values of advancing and receding contact angles for a solid surface are highly sensitive to many parameters, such as temperature, humidity, homogeneity, and minor contamination of the surface and liquid. For example, the advancing and receding contact angles of a surface can differ at different locations.

Dynamic Contact Angle versus Static Contact Angle

Practical surfaces and coatings naturally show contact angle hysteresis, indicating a range of equilibrium values. When we measure static contact angles, we get a single value within this range. Solely relying on static measurements poses problems, like poor repeatability and incomplete surface assessment regarding adhesion, cleanliness, roughness, and homogeneity.

In practical applications, we need to understand how easily a liquid spreads (advancing angle) and how easily it is removed (receding angle), such as in painting and cleaning. Measuring advancing and receding angles offers a holistic view of liquid-solid interaction, unlike static measurements, which yield an arbitrary value within the range.

This insight is crucial for real-world surfaces with variations, roughness, and dynamics, aiding industries like cosmetics, materials science, and biotechnology in designing effective surfaces and optimizing processes.

Learn how Contact Angle measurement is done on our Tensiometer

For a more complete understanding of Contact Angle measurement, read our Contact Angle measurement: The Definitive Guide

Contact Angle measurement: The Definitive Guide

Open Benchmark Data: Contact Angle & Surface Energy

These reference measurements show how deionized water wets four standard substrates measured with the Droplet Lab Dropometer. Use them as visual and numerical benchmarks when you're checking your own sample preparation, treatments, and chemistry.

Full contact angle and surface energy datasets (including additional liquids and statistics) are available on our dataset hub.

Glass - DI Water
Glass - DI Water
Nylon - DI Water
Nylon - DI Water
PMMA - DI Water
PMMA - DI Water
Teflon - DI Water
Teflon - DI Water

The droplet images above are taken from the same benchmark series as our open dataset. For each substrate and probe liquid we report:

● Advancing and receding contact angles (and hysteresis)
● Derived surface energy (SFE) values based on multi-liquid measurements
● Measurement conditions, uncertainties, and sample preparation details

Comparing your own droplet shapes and angles against these references is a fast way to spot contamination, treatment drift, or unexpected changes in wettability.

Explore the full benchmark datasets (contact angle + surface energy)

Measurements were performed with the Droplet Lab Dropometer under controlled laboratory conditions. Treat these values as sanity checks and starting points for your own process targets, not as product specifications.

Chapter 3: Surface Tension Measurement

This property measures the force that acts on the surface of a liquid, aiming to minimize its surface area.

Surface Tension Measurement

Sample Image taken from Droplet Lab Tensiometer

Dynamic Surface Tension

Dynamic surface tension differs from static surface tension, which refers to the surface energy per unit area (or force acting per unit length along the edge of a liquid surface).

Static surface tension characterizes the equilibrium state of the liquid interface, while dynamic surface tension accounts for the kinetics of changes at the interface. These changes could involve the presence of surfactants, additives, or variations in temperature, pressure, and composition at the interface.

When to use Dynamic Surface Tension Measurement

Dynamic surface tension is essential for processes that involve rapid changes at the liquid-gas or liquid-liquid interface, such as droplet and bubble formation, coalescence (change in surface area), the behavior of foams, and the drying of paints (change in composition, e.g., evaporation of solvent). It is measured by analyzing the shape of a hanging droplet over time.

Dynamic surface tension applies to various industries, including cosmetics, coatings, pharmaceuticals, paint, food and beverage, and industrial processes, where understanding and controlling the behavior of liquid interfaces is essential for product quality and process efficiency.

Learn how Surface Tension measurement is done on our Tensiometer

For a more complete understanding of Surface Energy measurement, read our Surface Tension measurement: The Definitive Guide

Surface Tension measurement: The Definitive Guide

Chapter 4: Surface Energy Measurement

Surface energy refers to the energy required to create a unit area of a new surface.
231

Sample Image taken from Droplet Lab Tensiometer

Learn how Surface Energy measurement is done on our Tensiometer

For a more complete understanding of Surface Energy measurement, read our Surface Energy measurement: The Definitive Guide

Surface Energy measurement: The Definitive Guide

For benchmark contact angle and surface energy values on glass, nylon, PMMA, and Teflon, see the Open Benchmark Data panel above or visit our Dataset Hub for full CSV downloads.

Dataset Hub

Chapter 5: Sliding Angle Measurement

The sliding angle measures the angle at which a liquid film slides over a solid surface. It is commonly employed to assess the slip resistance of a surface.

sliding angle 1

Sample Image taken from Droplet Lab Tensiometer

Learn how Sliding Angle measurement is done on our Tensiometer

For a more complete understanding of Sliding Angle measurement, read our Sliding Angle Measurement: The Definitive Guide

Sliding Angle Measurement: The Definitive Guide

Chapter 6: Real-World Applications

Within the Utilities industry, several case studies exemplify the advantages of conducting surface property measurements.

Dual-Modal Assay Kit for the Qualitative and Quantitative Determination of the Total Water Hardness Using a Permanent Marker Fabricated Microfluidic Paper-Based Analytical Device

This paper reports a dip‑and‑read microfluidic paper-based analytical device (µPAD) for qualitative and quantitative measurement of total water hardness. The authors fabricate hydrophobic barriers on filter paper using common office tools, a standard printer plus a commercially available permanent marker, aiming to enable low-cost fabrication in labs without specialized equipment. They first assess marker inks for wettability and barrier performance, selecting the most hydrophobic colors for reliable liquid confinement. The final device includes five reaction/detection zones aligned with WHO hardness classes, providing a naked-eye, color-change readout (blue → pink) in about 3 minutes to classify water as soft, moderately hard, hard, or very hard. For quantitative use, they implement an alternative colorimetric approach that enables numeric hardness estimation without requiring EDTA in the quantification channel, while maintaining low complexity and cost. The reported limit of detection is 0.02 mM, substantially lower than typical commercial test strips and several reported µPAD methods, and real-world tap-water results agree with standard EDTA titration. The device remains stable for ~2 months under room and refrigerated storage and withstands short exposure across 25-100 °C, supporting field use without sophisticated handling.

Role of the Droplet Lab Goniometer

The Droplet Lab instrument (reported as a Dropometer by Droplet Smart Tech, with analysis via a sessile-drop app) was used to quantify water contact angles on permanent-marker-treated paper to select ink colors that form robust hydrophobic barriers.

  • In Methods 2.6 (page 6), the authors describe applying marker inks (blue, green, red, black) to Whatman Grade 4 filter paper, placing an HPLC-water droplet, capturing an image, and analyzing it with a sessile-drop application.

In Results 3.1 and Figure 3b (pages 7-8), they report high contact angles (e.g., ~151° for blue and ~158° for green at 10 s), supporting the decision to fabricate µPAD barriers with blue/green markers for better confinement and reduced leakage.
Why this matters: The goniometer data directly underpins barrier material selection, a critical factor for utility-field devices where leakage or poor channel definition can invalidate a hardness test.

Key Findings

  • Marker-ink hydrophobicity was quantified via contact angle, enabling rational selection of barrier inks (green/blue most hydrophobic; Results §3.1; Figure 3b).
  • Leakage testing confirmed that green/blue barriers resisted leakage under dyed-water challenge, while red/black leaked (Figure 4, page 9).
  • The µPAD provides WHO-aligned qualitative hardness classification (soft → very hard) by blue-to-pink zone changes in ~3 min (device concept Figures 1 & 5; qualitative results Figure 6a).
  • A quantitative route uses the control detection zone and color intensity analysis (scanner/phone + ImageJ) to build a calibration curve (Figure 6b).
  • LOD = 0.02 mM, outperforming typical commercial strips and several prior µPAD reports (Results 3.2.3; comparison Figure 7).
  • Real tap-water samples from multiple locations showed close agreement with standard EDTA titration (Figure 8).
  • The device demonstrates shelf stability (weeks at room temp and 4 °C) and temperature robustness (short exposures up to 100 °C) (Figure 9).

Common ions showed minimal interference under tested conditions (Figure 10).

Why it Matters

For utilities, hardness is a practical driver of scaling risk, customer complaints, and treatment decisions (e.g., softening dose, corrosion/incrustation balance). This work demonstrates a field-ready approach that can screen and classify hardness in minutes without pipettes or bulky instrumentation, while also offering a quantitative option when numeric tracking is required (e.g., verifying treatment performance, monitoring district variability). The contact-angle‑guided selection of barrier inks improves device reliability, supporting repeatable point-of-use testing that can inform operational adjustments and maintenance prioritization across distribution networks.

Method Snapshot

  • Substrate/sample: Whatman Grade 4 filter paper squares coated with different permanent-marker inks (blue/green/red/black).

Droplet & conditions: HPLC-grade water sessile droplet at room conditions; static/sessile contact angle recorded (reported at ~10 s and tracked up to 60 s). Surface tension was not measured in this study (water used as the probe liquid).

Data Note

The contact angle measurement over time for the black marker, blue marker, red marker, and green marker on Whatman® Grade 4 filter paper on exposure to drops of HPLC grade water (slanted shade is measurement at 10 s and full color shade is mean measurement over 60 s). Each bar represents the mean of the three individual experiments standard deviation.

Figure

Citation (APA Format)

Oyewunmi, O. D., Safiabadi-Tali, S. H., & Jahanshahi-Anbuhi, S. (2020). Dual-modal assay kit for the qualitative and quantitative determination of the total water hardness using a permanent marker fabricated microfluidic paper-based analytical device. Chemosensors, 8(4), 97. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors8040097

View Publication →

Equipment durability and corrosion resistance

Offshore and outdoor equipment lasts longer when water cannot sit on its surfaces. Water repellent coatings help, but only while they keep their repellency. Static contact angle shows how strongly a coating repels water, and sliding angle shows whether drops actually run off.

Measure coatings when new and again after weathering, then compare with a reference panel tested the same day. Our anti soiling validation page sets out that test plan. Contact angle tracks the coating surface; it does not measure corrosion rate, so keep your corrosion tests.

Equipment durability and corrosion resistance

Coatings for safety and fire protection

Low surface energy coatings make it harder for oils and other flammable liquids to spread and cling to plant equipment. Surface free energy, worked out from contact angles of two or more probe liquids, shows how easily a liquid will wet the coated surface.

Use our contact angle to surface energy calculator to compare candidate coatings with the same probe liquids and model. Our surface energy guide explains the method. Wetting data does not measure fire resistance, which needs its own fire tests.

Coatings for safety and fire protection

Silicone rubber insulators and oil contamination

Silicone rubber insulators shed water because of their surface, and they can recover that repellency after discharge. Pollution or oil on the surface can change it. Water contact angles on housing samples, read at fixed times, show how much repellency remains.

IEC TS 62073 describes the contact angle, surface tension and spray methods for insulator surfaces. IEC TR 62039 gives guidance on choosing polymer materials for outdoor high voltage insulation. Our insulator hydrophobicity use case sets out a lab protocol.

Silicone rubber insulators and oil contamination

Insulating oil ageing in transformers

As transformer insulating oil ages, its interfacial tension against water falls. Interfacial tension is one of several lab checks on oil condition, alongside acidity, moisture and dissolved gas analysis.

ASTM D2285 used the drop weight method and has been withdrawn; ASTM D971 and IEC 62961 ring methods remain the reference. The Dropometer reads one hanging drop by pendant drop, which can give different numbers, so build a correlation on your own oils first. See our oil ageing use case.

Insulating oil ageing in transformers

Steel wetting and corrosion in multiphase flow

When oil, water and gas flow together in steel pipe, corrosion depends on which liquid wets the wall. Corrosion inhibitors that adsorb on steel can shift the surface toward oil wetting. Contact angle of a water drop on the steel under oil shows which way the surface has moved.

Interfacial tension between the oil and the brine adds a second signal, since inhibitors are surface active. Our surface and interfacial tension guide covers the pendant drop method. Wetting data supports inhibitor screening; it does not replace corrosion rate tests.

Steel wetting and corrosion in multiphase flow

We are your partners in solving your Business & Technological challenges

If you are interested in implementing these or any other applications, please contact us.

Contact Us

Chapter 7: Standards and Guidelines

In an industry where precision reigns supreme, how can Utilities manufacturers ensure their products withstand scrutiny? The answer lies in standards and guidelines: the compass that guides them through the complex maze of quality and performance.

IEC TS 62073, Guidance on the Measurement of Hydrophobicity of Insulator Surfaces (Method A focus: Contact Angle)

What it is

IEC TS 62073 is a technical specification that gives guidance for measuring the hydrophobicity of insulator surfaces using three approaches (A: contact angle, B: surface-tension method, C: spray method). Method A evaluates hydrophobicity via sessile-drop (and, where needed, captive-bubble) contact angles, typically reporting static (θs) and, when performed, advancing (θa) and receding (θr).

When to use it

Acceptance / QA of insulators and coatings

Use Method A when you need numeric, comparable evidence of “how hydrophobic is this surface right now?” on defined zones, with traceable documentation.

Ageing, pollution, and recovery programs (lab or field trending)

Use Method A when you need repeatable zone-by-zone time series to detect hydrophobicity loss, recovery, or increasing non-uniformity.

In-scope / Out-of-scope

In scope
  • Composite (polymeric) housings/sheds and ceramic insulators (coated or uncoated)
  • Hydrophobicity as a time-stamped observation (the measured value reflects the surface state at the time of measurement)
  • Multi-area / multi-zone sampling expectations (hydrophobicity is spatially variable around an insulator)
  • Method A angle guidance including θs and (when measured) θa and θr, with θr emphasized as most representative of hydrophobic behavior
Out of scope
  • Hydrophobicity Class (HC/1…HC/7) reporting as a numeric angle (HC classes belong to Method C spray results and should not be mixed with θ values)
  • Universal pass/fail thresholds for maintenance decisions (action bands must be calibrated to your fleet, environment, and risk criteria)
  • Guaranteeing high-precision “ideal surface” metrology on installed/service-aged parts (real geometries/pollution layers limit precision)
  • Direct flashover-risk prediction from a single contact angle without correlation to operational indicators (e.g., leakage current, site severity)

Minimum you must report (checklist)

  • Test object identification: insulator ID, material type (polymeric/ceramic), coating status, and surface condition (as-found / cleaned / aged / polluted).
  • Method declaration: IEC TS 62073 Method A (contact angle) and whether sessile-drop and/or captive-bubble was used.
  • Zone map / location definition: where each measurement was taken (e.g., trunk vs shed edge vs rib tip; windward vs leeward), with counts per zone.
  • Water quality: de-ionized water (and any handling/storage notes that could affect surface tension).
  • Environmental metadata: temperature and relative humidity (and, if relevant, exposure step/time since exposure).
  • Angles and replicates: θr (primary), plus θa and θs when measured; number of droplets per zone; summary stats per zone (at least median + spread such as IQR).
  • Evidence artifacts: per-drop image(s) or overlays showing the fitted baseline/edge and angle values (audit-ready traceability).
  • Data-quality and deviations: rejection criteria used (e.g., glare/edge distortion, unstable baseline fit, droplet sliding/roll-off) and any deviations from your SOP (including geometry-driven switch to captive-bubble).

IEC TS 62073 treats hydrophobicity as time- and location-dependent, so defensible practice requires repeatable conditions and multi-area sampling rather than one-off single-spot readings. Tools like Dropometer can standardize droplet placement, image capture, analysis, zone tagging, and reporting, but they do not replace the official IEC document.

How to interpret results (guardrails)

  • Prioritize θr for decisions: higher θr generally means the surface more readily de-wets (less persistent water film) at the time of test; lower θr suggests greater wetting tendency.
  • Use trends + zone maps, not single numbers: increasing zone-to-zone spread is often the operational signal (UV-facing vs sheltered; edge vs trunk), not “noise.”
  • Treat hysteresis (Δθ = θa − θr) as a diagnostic: large hysteresis often indicates pinning/heterogeneity/contamination and can increase scatter, don’t over-interpret it as a single-cause proof.
  • Calibrate action bands internally: define Green/Yellow/Red (or equivalent) from your own correlation data (e.g., leakage current, inspections, site severity), because the TS provides the measurement framework, not universal cutoffs.
Read our IEC TS 62073 page View the official IEC TS 62073 Standard

Now It’s Your Turn

We hope this guide showed you how to apply surface science in the Utilities industry.

Now we’d like to turn it over to you: 

  • What’s the #1 real-world application from this post that you want to try first?
  • Perhaps we missed a relevant industry standard.
  • Or maybe you have a question about something you read.

Feel free to leave a comment below—we’d love to hear from you.

Frequently asked questions

Which surface measurement should a utility lab start with?

Start with the asset you are most worried about. Use water contact angle for silicone insulators, membranes and outdoor coatings. Use interfacial tension for insulating oil condition. Add sliding angle when you need to know whether drops run off, not just bead. Our contact angle guide and sliding angle guide explain each method.

Which standards apply to insulator hydrophobicity and oil testing?

IEC TS 62073 describes contact angle, surface tension and spray methods for insulator hydrophobicity, and sets no universal pass limits. IEC TR 62039 is guidance on polymer material selection, not a test method. For oil, ASTM D971 and IEC 62961 ring methods are the reference. The Dropometer uses the sessile drop and pendant drop methods, so check which method your specification names.

Can pendant drop replace the ring method for insulating oil?

No. Pendant drop measures the same property, oil to water interfacial tension, by a different method. It works well as a fast screen to trend samples and decide which ones go for full analysis. Read every sample at the same drop age and use correct densities at the test temperature. Our oil ageing page explains how to set alert bands.

How is contact angle used to study membrane fouling?

Measure water contact angle on new, fouled and cleaned membranes with the same method each time. At Lakehead University, Prof. Baoqiang Liao's group used a Dropometer on PVDF membranes from an anaerobic membrane bioreactor. Membrane contact angle fell 20%, 24% and 39% after runs at 32, 45 and 55 day solids retention times. See the Lakehead case study and the 2025 membrane paper.

Does sludge wettability change with reactor conditions?

In the Lakehead work, it did. A 2022 paper measured the contact angle of reactor sludge at three organic loading rates and found values between 24 and 64 degrees. See our analysis of the organic loading rate paper and the related PhD thesis, which tracked membrane and sludge contact angles across reactor conditions.

Can contact angle help build water quality sensors?

Yes. The McLamore lab at Clemson University uses contact angle as a quality check on laser inscribed graphene electrodes before electrochemical testing. In a coating screen for a creek water orthophosphate sensor, GO PDDA read above 120 degrees and DADMAC below 45 degrees. See the Clemson case study and our analysis of the dip and read orthophosphate sensor.

Has contact angle been used for paper based water hardness tests?

Yes. A Concordia University team used the Dropometer to compare permanent marker barriers on filter paper. At 10 seconds, green read 158 degrees and blue 151 degrees, and devices with those barriers did not leak. See the Chemosensors paper and the related thesis.

How accurate is the Dropometer?

The drop shape method was validated against a KRUSS DSA100E in two peer reviewed papers, one in Review of Scientific Instruments and one in Colloids and Surfaces A. Published contact angle accuracy is 0.35 degrees. Automatic edge and baseline detection gives the same reading from the same image. See our validation papers.

Standards, evidence and resources

1. Industry standards
  • ASTM D2285: oil to water interfacial tension: This withdrawn field test used drop weight to measure insulating oil interfacial tension against water, which falls as oil ages; the Dropometer measures it by pendant drop instead.
  • ASTM D971: ring method oil interfacial tension: Sets out the ring method, the reference result for insulating oil interfacial tension against water, while a pendant drop screen can trend transformer oil ageing between lab tests.
  • IEC TR 62039: outdoor insulator polymer selection: Guidance for choosing polymer housing materials for outdoor high voltage insulation, where water contact angle screens how well clean and polluted specimens keep and transfer hydrophobicity.
Use cases Case studies
  • Clemson University McLamore biosensor lab: The lab uses water contact angle as a quality check on laser inscribed graphene electrodes, including coating screens for a creek water orthophosphate sensor.
  • Concordia University paper microfluidics lab: The lab measured water contact angle on paper device barriers and channels, including a water hardness test, and paired it with SEM and FTIR to help explain weak signals.
  • GIST membrane lab: A membrane research lab ordered the Dropometer with a tilting stage to check water contact angle on liquid repellent membranes, the surface property behind membrane wetting.
  • Lakehead University membrane bioreactor lab: Prof. Liao's group added water contact angle on reactor sludge and PVDF membranes to its fouling tests on a bioreactor that turns pulp mill sludge into biogas.
Client citations (our analysis of each paper) Use case collections Further resources