4.3 Article

Using Parabolic Flights to Examine Quantitatively the Stability of Liquid Bridges under Varying Total Body Force

Journal

MICROGRAVITY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages 145-153

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12217-015-9423-3

Keywords

Bond number; Liquid bridges; Microgravity; Parabolic flights

Funding

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration under Reduced Gravity Student Flight Program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Liquid bridges were flown aboard a Boeing 727-200 aircraft in a series of parabolic arcs that produced multiple periods of microgravity. During the microgravity portion of each arc, g(eff), the effective total body acceleration due to external forces became negligibly small so that cylindrical liquid bridges could be suspended across two coaxial support posts. Near the bottom of each arc, g(eff) slowly increased to a maximum of 1.84g, causing the liquid bridges to deform and in some cases collapse. Although the physics of liquid bridges subject to varying total body force is well-established and has been analyzed extensively both theoretically and experimentally, specific hardware was designed to vary g(eff) in a precise way that overcomes the gravity-related limitations and high g-jitter associated with parabolic flights. Bridge-stability was examined for axial and lateral orientations with respect to g(eff) by measuring the slenderness ratio as a function of Bond number at the instant of bridge collapse. Results exhibit remarkable agreement with theory as well as with the experimental results obtained in a magnetic levitation-based experiment. The parabolic flight method offers technical originality and provides experimental insights for researchers in the microgravity field. Here we present hardware development, experimental considerations, and results, and demonstrate that parabolic flight is a viable alternative to extant techniques for quantitative experiments on fluids.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available