2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11440-014-0352-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Capillary rise method for the measurement of the contact angle of soils

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
16
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
2
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For spherical particles, wet samples of glass beads may show low contact angle values (ď 10 0 ) [30,32], while the contact angle between steel balls and water is around 50 0 [34]. As far as real sandy soils are concerned, contact angle values reaching 50 0 and more have been reported in [2,20]. Adding to complexity, the contact angle is also dependent on the hydraulic loading path; its value showing a hysteresis between extreme limits that correspond to receding or advancing contact lines.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For spherical particles, wet samples of glass beads may show low contact angle values (ď 10 0 ) [30,32], while the contact angle between steel balls and water is around 50 0 [34]. As far as real sandy soils are concerned, contact angle values reaching 50 0 and more have been reported in [2,20]. Adding to complexity, the contact angle is also dependent on the hydraulic loading path; its value showing a hysteresis between extreme limits that correspond to receding or advancing contact lines.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We referred to already published experimental results to examine whether these differences are general, or specific to the current experimental setup. As we were not aware of any capillary rise in capillary tubes having a CA(t), we referred to a comparable method that has been commonly used for measuring CA for wettable and water‐repellent soils: the capillary rise method (CRM) (Alghunaim et al, 2016; Bachmann et al, 2003; Liu et al, 2016). In the CRM, the tested soil is packed uniformly in a tube, the bottom of which touches or is immersed in the tested fluid.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The CA is typically measured with the sessile drop method (i.e., by fixing solid particles on a glass slide, placing a liquid droplet on top, and measuring the CA optically in upright projection images) (Bachmann et al., 2000). Alternative approaches are to derive the CA indirectly from flow behavior, in terms of water drop penetration time (Wallis & Horne, 1992) or capillary rise dynamics (Letey et al., 1962; Liu et al., 2016), or from measured forces, when dipping and pulling a treated surface into and from a liquid, respectively (Letey et al., 1962). Each method has certain advantages and limitations in terms of accuracy and robustness and may cover different aspects of soil water repellency (e.g., dynamic vs. equilibrium CAs).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%