Calculate smallest pore that will admit water

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bacat
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Water
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the smallest pore size that allows water entry in the context of hydrophobicity research with dried powders. The user seeks to correlate surface tension with pore sizes and is exploring the relationship between capillary pressure and pore dimensions. They express uncertainty about calculating the contact angle for powders and whether to set it arbitrarily, with suggestions to consider a contact angle greater than 90 degrees for hydrophobic materials. The user concludes that setting the contact angle to 90 degrees simplifies the calculation, allowing them to equate surface tension to atmospheric pressure divided by pore size. Additionally, they raise the question of the significance of gravity forces on water droplets in this context, suggesting the need to calculate the Bond number for further insight.
Bacat
Messages
149
Reaction score
1
I am conducting some hydrophobicity research with dried powders. I have known mixtures of fluid from which I can calculate surface tension. I have data about the powders regarding which mixtures easily wet the surface and which bead up into drops. I also have BET surface area histograms which tell me the relative distributions of pore sizes on the powders.

I can correlate the surface tensions with the pore sizes and that's interesting, but I want to explain them also. I believe I can explain the hydrophobicity of micropores (about 10 angstroms in width or less) by arguing that the capillary pressure in them is too high to allow water to penetrate at atmospheric pressure. My question is how to calculate this pressure.

I know that capillary pressure is:

P_c=\frac{2 \gamma Cos\theta}{r}

where gamma is surface tension of the liquid, theta is the contact angle of the liquid at the solid interface, and r is the radius of a pore. I'm not sure how to calculate the contact angle for a powder given a known gamma. Is this the wrong approach?

I'm also not clear what the balancing force should be. I want to find the pore size which forbids entry of the fluid into the pore for a given gamma. I am assuming atmospheric pressure, so do I just need to find the r that makes P_c equal to P_atm?

Can I choose an arbitrary contact angle and get a reasonable estimate?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Laplace's equation is the pressure *jump* across the interface; it's the excess pressure required. The contact angle does not properly figure in that equation.

Young's equation does involve the contact angle, and I'm sure relates to wetting in a small pore- if nothing else, it's the boundary condition for the interface shape and so involves Laplace's equation.

As for setting a contact angle, it's hard to say precisely what it would be, but for a hydrophobic material you could certainly assume a contact angle greater than 90 degrees.

Does that help?
 
I think I should just set theta equal to 90 degrees then, ie the limiting case. Then the pressure of interest is just the surface tension divided by the pore size. I think I just need to match this to atmospheric pressure.

Another question is whether a drop of water will have significant gravity forces in this regime.
 
Calculate the Bond number, that will tell you.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

Is this a valid way to calculate capillary force / pressure?
Replies
8
Views
2K
How to calculate maximum surface pressure a silicon wafer can withstand?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Calculating the Probability of Particles Traveling Through Different Size Pores
Replies
2
Views
1K
Melting/freezing point depression of water vs. other liquids
Replies
1
Views
3K
Surface Tension - Using hot soapy water to wash clothes
Replies
1
Views
2K
I Issue calculating water pressure due to the constriction of water flow
Replies
9
Views
2K
Upside down Cup with water to hold the plate
Replies
2
Views
3K
Surface Tension and Pressure Balance in a Spherical Water Drop
Replies
2
Views
2K
How does water rise along a glass plate? (surface tension question)
Replies
2
Views
1K
Effect of ambient pressure on Newton cooling (water)
Replies
2
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top