Critique on Vermant, Fluid-mechanics when shape matters, Nature, 2011, 476,

286
Rachael Sim
In Fluid-mechanics when shape matters, Vermant sets out how to explain how
the coffee-ring effect can be prevented by the use of ellipsoidal particles. This
essay aims to provide a summary, describe the major strengths and weaknesses of
the article and evaluate different aspects of the article such its coverage and depth,
assumption and bias, significance and implication, length and value as well as style
and format. Subsequently, area for improvement will be suggested.
Vermant starts the article by describing what exactly is the coffee ring effect and
Yunker et al. study, which is what the journal article is mainly about. He then
explained how the coffee-ring effect is usually formed and provided a detailed
explanation of how ellipsoidal shaped particles can counteract surface tension and
thus prevent the coffee ring effect. Subsequently, he described the methodology of
Yunker and his colleagues and reiterated their findings that adding small amounts of
ellipsoids to a suspension of spheres is enough to suppress the formation of the
coffee ring. Vermant then explains the significance and potential applications of
Yunkers research.
The strengths of the article include sufficient coverage of the effect of ellipsoidal
particles and detailed descriptions. Another strength is that figure illustrations with
captions were used to effectively support his explanation of how the coffee-ring
effect is formed and the difference when ellipsoidal particles are used. However,
after reading the letter Suppression of the coffee-ring effect by shape-dependent
capillary interactions by Yunker and his colleagues, I think Vermant could have
gone more in depth and provided more information on some instances. Based on
the title of his article, Vermant could have provided more direct comparisons
between spherical and ellipsoidal particles, such as the direction and characteristics
of capillary flow, the air-water interface, surface tension, evaporation rates and the
deposition pattern. Perhaps, he could have referred to the microscopic images of
ellipsoids and spheres after evaporation in Yunker and his colleagues paper and
provide illustrations of the difference in air-water interface. This may be better than
solely describing how ellipsoidal particles increase interfacial viscosity and stabilize
the flow.
However, the article has some parts which lack clarity. For example, Vermant did not
clearly state the exact effects of the addition of small amounts of surfactant
observed before discussing what it means and whether it supports Yunkers
hypothesis. It is also vague when he described the effect of the surfactants as
more complicated than shown. Does it mean that surfactants also helped to
suppress the coffee-ring effect through the manipulation of gradients in surface
tension or that the suppression effect caused by ellipsoidal particles will be stronger
without surfactants as surfactants reduce the efficiency of the particle self-

assembly? Vermant needs to clearly highlight the best explanation of what is

observed and briefly mentioned other factors to consider. Perhaps, he should have
also explained why Yunker and his colleagues chose to include this additional step in
their research and how
they conclusively determined that it supports their
hypothesis. It was clearer in Yunkers original letter. Another section of the article
that is slightly unclear is the link between the Cheerios effect, the cereal-milk
example and the water and ellipsoidal particles case which is of interest. Vermant
describes how the weight of cereal particles deforms the air-milk interface and how
this deformation is impossible for sufficiently small particles. However, he did not
explain the significance of the deformation of the air-particle interface. Is the
distortion necessary so that surface tension will force particles together?
The article did not make many assumptions and is generally fair. Perhaps, the
limitations of using ellipsoidal particles can be brought up, if they exist. The author
also mentioned other ways to obtain similar lateral capillary forces, such as particle
roughness or chemical heterogeneity. However, he did not describe them further
and compare their effectiveness. This might be due to the lack of research available
and it might not be the focus of the article.
The great significance and implications of this article have already been clearly
highlighted by Vermant throughout the text and particularly in the last 2
paragraphs. In the introduction, he described how the coffee-ring effect causes
problems for a "number of technological applications, such as coating techniques or
inkjet printing. Hence, Yunkers study, which suggest how to build interface
resistance to bulk flow by exploiting the effect of particles shape can help to
stabilize these processes in which the coffee-ring effect is problematic.
Subsequently, he also mentioned how Yunker results may be relevant to many
everyday products such as creams and lotions used as cosmetics and
pharmaceuticals, which come in the form of foams or emulsions. Ellipsoidal particles
help to stabilize such emulsions by creating a stronger interface resistance.
The length of the article is appropriate as it is to the point and has wide coverage.
The article adds value and contribute to the field, as other studies usually try to
prevent the coffee-ring effect by alternative methods, such as by adding surfactants
like oil which may be toxic but not be as effective. Vermont also mentioned how
Yunkers findings can spur research into the interfacial viscosity and elasticity of
systems with both ellipsoids and spheres.
The style and format of the article is good. It is written in a concise, interesting and
understandable way. Word use is precise and proper scientific terminologies and
tenses were used. There were appropriate references to other sources and the
figures. The short abstract is specific and representative of the articles content.
Although the title was appropriate, it does not give an idea that the article will be
discussing the coffee-ring effect. It might cause readers to expect comparisons
between the impact of different shapes on different aspects of fluid dynamics.
Although the introduction provided good background information, the purpose of

the article could be made clearer. Hence, there is room for improvement. Vermant
could have organized his points differently. Since Yunker et al. study is the main
reference, it is more natural to begin with a summary of the objectives of Yunker
and his colleagues research, followed by their methodology and subsequently, the
findings and interpretation of the results before explaining the microscopic process
of how ellipsoidal particles prevent the coffee-ring effect. This would give the reader
a clearer idea of what the article is about and Yunkers study. Perhaps, he could
make more references to other research that supports and build on Yunkers study.
Also, not every paragraph has a clear topic sentence.
In summary, Fluid-mechanics when shape matters is an informative and concise
journal article, describing a valuable research on a new area how the effect of
particle shape can be exploited to prevent the coffee ring effect which caused
numerous problems. However, there is still room for improvement to make the
article clearer and an easier read.