4.7 Article

Modelling the effect of pore structure and wetting angles on capillary rise in soils having different wettabilities

Journal

JOURNAL OF HYDROLOGY
Volume 328, Issue 3-4, Pages 604-613

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.01.003

Keywords

capillary rise; pore waviness; contact angle; soil repellency

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Capillary rise in axis symmetrical sinusoidal capillary (SC) has been modelled. Analytical formula for meniscus radius, capillary pressure and meniscus rate in SC have been found. Capillary shape described by watt waviness highly influences all of them. The limit between wettability and repellency in such capillary is described by critical value of contact angle theta(C) which is related to the pore geometry by the equation ctg(theta(c)) = pi d(2), where d(2) - pore watt waviness. Kinetics of capillary rise in sinusoidal capillary has been determined by numerical integration of meniscus rate equation for a wide range of pore watt waviness and several values of contact angles. Application of Washburn theory to the data obtained from simulation gives the contact angle value much higher than the true one. In contrast, the obtained pore radius value is usually well correlated with capillary neck. However, in some cases a calculated radius can be even smaller. Above conclusions have been qualitatively confirmed by experiments performed on glass beads and soils. Contact angle measured on flat glass was 27.4 degrees. The calculations concerning the data from capillary rise experiments on 90-1000 mu m fraction of glass powder and Washburn theory gave values ca. 80 degrees. The contact angle values for peat soils and loamy sand have close values, which supports the opinion that non-cylindrical shape of soil pores highly influences both the wettability/repellency and the water flux in soils. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available