Water bubble inside a microchannel

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Excom
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bubble Water
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the force required to move a water bubble inside a microchannel, particularly focusing on the effects of increased air pressure on one side of the bubble. The scope includes theoretical considerations and exploratory reasoning related to microfluidics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks guidance on how to begin calculating the force needed to move the bubble, indicating a lack of experience in microfluidics.
  • Another participant requests clarification on the initial question, suggesting that more details are needed to understand the problem.
  • A participant describes the scenario of a water bubble in a microchannel with air on both sides and asks how much the pressure must be increased on one side before the bubble moves.
  • One response discusses the forces involved, suggesting that gravity can be ignored and focusing on wetting phenomena. It mentions Young's equation and proposes a simplified model assuming a contact angle of 90 degrees, while noting that various microscopic models exist for wetting.
  • The response provides a formula for the required pressure difference based on interfacial energies and the radius of the bubble, indicating that as the channel size decreases, the required pressure difference increases.
  • The participant encourages experimental measurement to validate the proposed model, expressing curiosity about the results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion contains multiple viewpoints and remains unresolved, with no consensus on the exact approach or calculations needed to determine the force required to move the bubble.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully defined assumptions regarding the bubble's properties, the microchannel dimensions, or the effects of surface conditions on the calculations. The discussion also highlights the complexity of wetting phenomena, which may influence the results.

Excom
Messages
58
Reaction score
0
Hi

I need to calculate the force needed to move a water bubble inside a microchannel. Initially, the bubble is at rest and then the air pressure is increased on one side of the bubble.

I am new in microfluidic and need some help about where to start in order to solve this problem.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hi
i didn't understand for you
can you tall us whether more,please
thanks
 
I have a water bubble inside at microchannel. There is air on both sides of the bubble. I then increase the air pressure on one side of the bubble. The air pressure on the other sides is not changed. How much do I have to increase the pressure before the bubble starts to move?
 
This is a great question! I'm not sure I have an answer, but let's see..

What are forces involved? We can ignore gravity. So it's really wetting: the air/water/glass common line must move in order for the bubble to move. Now, wetting is not understood and there are a lot of microscopic models that have been proposed, but macroscopically, we can maybe estimate:

Young's equation relates the contact angle and interfacial energies. To make the text here easier, let's assume the contact angle is 90 degrees (It's not, but you can work this out later). The air-water interfacial energy is 70 dyn/cm, so multiply this by the circumference of the bubble and you have a certain force to overcome in order to move the contact line. Now, if the glass surface is dirty or otherwise rough all bets are off, but for now, let's just consider the surface to be clean, flat, chemically homogeneous, etc. And I've neglected the air-glass and water-glass interfacial energies.

Then the required pressure difference will be 2*70*2*pi*r/(2*pi*r^2)= 140/r dyn/cm^2. As the channel size goes down, r decreases, requiring a larger pressure difference- that agrees with reality, at least.

It's fairly easy to measure- try it out and see how well it agrees, I'm curious.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
7K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K