Wow! Thank you for all the replies. I'm still going through them. I have done some quick scanning. I don't have much in terms of equipment and I'm surprised this wasn't just something with a simple answer! I'm not complaining - I just was sure there would be some simple explanation about pressure and displacement. I like that I'm really going to learn a lot from the help here!
Before I start replying to posts, one thought: Most potters do this by dropping the bag of water and clay into a 5 gallon bucket. My teacher was just telling me how one potter drops it in her husband's hot tub. He has not complained about that or found problems like finding clay particles in the filter or that it changes the water by feel, color, or smell.
Dale said:
If you have a sous vide you could test temperature dependence. Room temperature and residential water temperature can fluctuate. I don’t think that variable has been adequately controlled
I don't have one. I see what you're saying about temperature. This happens in my studio and pretty much any potter's studio that knows the trick. I would think, though, that using water from the tap with less than a minute break between filling the bag and filling the bucket would mean the water for both is around the same temp, wouldn't it? And if it works for all potters, some who would use cold water, some hot, and in different studios with different temps, wouldn't that indicate temp is not a major issue - except, maybe in the speed of the recovery?
A.T. said:
Yes, but C doesn't have the same suspended clay concentration as D, where the suspended clay is prevented from dissipating throughout the whole bucket by the bag.
Note that they both seem to have about the same effectiveness, though - they infuse the clay a ways in, maybe as much as an inch.
A.T. said:
With regards to B vs D: Is the bag really so full of water, that it has the same shape as in D, as shown in the picture? Or does it sag to the bottom, and stick to the clay at the top?
Uh - well, I'm not really that much of an artist and not good at drawing! So I just used the square shape because it was quick and easy. But the clay bags are not much bigger than a full block of clay. However, there are times when you're recycling half a block. I fill the bag until the water almost covers the clay. The video linked to above uses less water. I hear some cover the clay. I try to squeeze as much air out as I can. But, yes, some water will make the bottom of the bag spread out and the top, where I tie off the bag, it fits closer to the clay in it. But there is water (at least when I do it) around the clay up until near the top of the clay.
Gavran said:
He's close. I don't know anyone who puts the first bag in a 2nd bag. And I'm not so sure he knows what he's saying when he says the outside pressure pushes the water in. Apparently it does, but how? And why is it that just using method C in my graphic doesn't do that?
jbriggs444 said:
What about the possibility that capillary action is responsible?
By itself, capillary action will tend to draw water into the clay. This will tend to expel any entrained air. If the clay is entirely immersed, there is nowhere for the entrained air to go. It is trapped and will be under some pressure. At best, it can attempt to bubble out the top. But surface tension will resist bubble formation. If, on the other hand, the clay has a surface exposed to air, then the entrained air has an exit pathway. Capillary action can then fully displace the entrained air.
The plastic bag is helpful because it ensures that air inside the bag will reach 100% relative humidity. The exposed clay will not dry out.
I can follow that reasoning and see how it makes sense. I don't think anyone puts clay in water but leaves the top uncovered. But if you put the clay in a bag of water, generally there's still some air there and I would think the air would be able to escape. But this leads to why does D work and not B, by itself?
I suspect you're onto something about the capillary action, but I don't know.
256bits said:
Pore size of plastic film is very small, much more so than the experiments that show the surface tension of water not allowing water to escape say from an eye dropper.
Okay, I need to rephrase that to be sure I follow the point you made in that post, including with the table and literature included. So if I have a big of water, water doesn't leak out due to surface tension, but if that bag of water is in other water, then water could permeate it and water from inside could seep through to outside? I think that's a good point. I don't know how the particle size for clay compares to water molecules, but when I pull the bag of clay out, I see no sign of clay particles in the bucket. Granted, it could be so little I don't see it, but the water in the bucket, at that point, is clear and when I pour the water out of the bag, it's clay colored.
DaveC426913 said:
I'd kind of like to see the OPs test results duplicated. It would rule out experimental error and also provide some numbers to work with.
Or is this already a well-known phenomenon?
It's well known. Not only from the video, but it's at least local lore. A lot of the potters in this area do this. I think, since it works for us all, that would indicate that water and room temp aren't a big issue since, after a few hours, all the water and the clay are at room temp anyway. Although, as I mentioned in this post, one potter puts the bag in her husband's hot tub. I don't have a way to find out from her how long that takes and if it's faster than what the rest of us see.
Hill said:
The video in post 5 does not show the experiment C.
Most pottery students, before we learned this trick, have tried both B and C. The results for the 2 are the same: Infusion around the edges, not inside. But, along with that, nobody has compared if infusion is deeper in C than B.
256bits said:
Whether the plastic bag acting as an permeable membrane allowing ion exchange, electron exchange, molecule exchange affecting the solute-solution concentration. or by other means such as flocculation, within the bag is where I started as an investigation, and in turn the rate of hydration of the clay. Actual data is surely not available as to support or deny any claim, except that of the opening post.
In addition, can such a claim be made for all types of clay material.
After reading what you included about the bag as permeable, I wonder - could it be that with the bag in water, something, ions, particles, anything, is able to leave the bag in D when it couldn't in B due to surface tension? As I mentioned, though, there is no indication of anything visible in the bucket water in D after the process finishes. But it could be air comes through there. I don't see bubbles on the bag when I empty it all, though.
I don't know at all how this works other than for the clays most people work with by hand. So if there's clays used for industry, that might be something entirely different.
But as we go over this, and since pressure doesn't seem to be a major factor, I have to think the permeability may be a big factor (if I understand it correctly). In my limited understanding, I'm wondering if it could be air or something ionic. Or maybe water permeates through the bag and clay doesn't, which might mean more water comes in to the bag than was there at first, or some water leaves, upping the concentration of clay particles.
256bits said:
But it does show D, the method of increasing the rate of hydration from the other methods.
Under uncontrolled conditions, D seems better than C.
Under controlled conditions, that may or may not be true.
ie is the permeability of the bag relevant -
ie is temperature relevant - hydration should be exothermic, is the bag water getting warmer,
@Dale
I'm not so sure it's just about rate. It's possible that B and C
might work if the clay is left for a week or so. My classes at the studio are weekly and when I've had some chunks of clay in there that got too dry, I sprayed the outside of them with water, then put them in a bag and left them a week. The outside edges hydrate, but not the inside, so I mix it and do again. It takes several weeks for this method to work.
Regarding temp, I would say most potters are doing this in an indoor studio, but sometimes they don't heat their studio when they're not working. I would think the whole system would end up at room temperature after a few hours, wouldn't it?