Hydrodynamics: Meniscus Height in Thin and Wide Cylinders

  • Thread starter Thread starter mkrems
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hydrodynamics
AI Thread Summary
In a thin cylinder, a meniscus forms due to hydrodynamics and surface tension, resulting in a characteristic height above the bulk water. The height of the meniscus, referred to as "h," is influenced by the cylinder's radius; as the cylinder widens, the height may change due to the balance of wetting forces and buoyancy, as described by the Laplace equation. The curvature of the fluid-fluid interface near the contact line remains constant regardless of the cylinder's geometry. Additionally, there is a limit to how small the tube can be, as smaller diameters require significantly higher pressures to drive fluid into the void. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for applications involving fluid behavior in varying geometries.
mkrems
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
If I have some water in a thin (on the order of micrometer or nanometer even) cylinder, a
meniscus will form due to hydrodynamics and surface tension effects. There will be some characteristic height of the meniscus above the surface of the "bulk" water. Let's call this height "h". If I make the cylinder wider, say, to a macroscopic dimension, will this height "h"
remain the same or change? Please offer a reference if possible!

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't understand your question- a cylinder is not an equilibrium fluid shape, unless there is contact line pinning (and no bouyancy).

In any case, the surface of the fluid is not physically distinct from the bulk- the surface can be endowed with properties that result in discontinuous bulk properties (jump conditions), but the meniscus does not exist at some height off of the bulk.

Can you expand your question a little more?
 
I am now looking at my "macroscopically sized" glass of water. It looks pretty flat - no obvious meniscus.
 
Oh- I think I understand what the poster is referring to.

The fluid-fluid interface is curved in the vicinity of the contact line due to the balance of the wetting force and bouyancy (Laplace equation). The height of the meniscus, as compared to the fluid height of the reserviour (http://www.ce.utexas.edu/prof/kinnas/319LAB/Book/CH1/PROPS/caprisegif.html) will depend on the radius of the tube because of the mass of fluid that has to be pulled up. But, the small amount of curvature in the immediate vicinity of the contact line is independent of the geometry and will always be present.

http://www.up.ac.za/academic/civil/divisions/geotechnical/pgcourses/sgm782/themes/theme3/objectives3.html

(section 3.1 is of relevance)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh- I think I understand what the poster is referring to.

The fluid-fluid interface is curved in the vicinity of the contact line due to the balance of the wetting force and bouyancy (Laplace equation). The height of the meniscus, as compared to the fluid height of the reserviour (http://www.ce.utexas.edu/prof/kinnas/319LAB/Book/CH1/PROPS/caprisegif.html) will depend on the radius of the tube because of the mass of fluid that has to be pulled up. But, the small amount of curvature in the immediate vicinity of the contact line is independent of the geometry and will always be present.

http://www.up.ac.za/academic/civil/divisions/geotechnical/pgcourses/sgm782/themes/theme3/objectives3.html

(section 3.1 is of relevance)

And there is a lower limit to how small the tube can be- Laplace's equation again. It shows that the pressure required to drive fluid into a small void increases as the pore radius decreases. To get water into a nanometer sized tube requires extremely high pressures, or extremely low interfacial energies.

Edit- not sure why there was a pseudo double-post.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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...
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?
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top