2011
DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2011.160
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The influence of the gas phase on liquid imbibition in capillary tubes

Abstract: The imbibition of liquid into a capillary tube is studied both theoretically and experimentally for sufficiently long tubes where viscous resistance from the gas phase ahead of the moving front is significant. At early times, and as the length of the tube is increased, we observe a systematic deviation from classical theory that cannot be attributed to the inertia of the liquid nor entrance effects. Instead, this behaviour is rationalized by considering the viscous resistance from the gas as it is displaced by… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
58
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
(17 reference statements)
1
58
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Nevertheless, as pointed out by van Honschoten et al 14 the Washburn model is derived for water imbibition without gas bubbles. 38,50 Therefore, a comprehensive explanation to the slower than expected capillary rates observed in the filling of nanochannels compared to the LW equation predictions remains an open question. Specifically, Chauvet et al 38 inferred that in sub 100 nm channels, the enhanced hydrodynamic resistance induced by the presence of nanobubbles is compensated for by the effect of the reduced volume to fill induced by the same gas nanobubbles.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Nevertheless, as pointed out by van Honschoten et al 14 the Washburn model is derived for water imbibition without gas bubbles. 38,50 Therefore, a comprehensive explanation to the slower than expected capillary rates observed in the filling of nanochannels compared to the LW equation predictions remains an open question. Specifically, Chauvet et al 38 inferred that in sub 100 nm channels, the enhanced hydrodynamic resistance induced by the presence of nanobubbles is compensated for by the effect of the reduced volume to fill induced by the same gas nanobubbles.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, Chauvet et al 38 inferred that in sub 100 nm channels, the enhanced hydrodynamic resistance induced by the presence of nanobubbles is compensated for by the effect of the reduced volume to fill induced by the same gas nanobubbles. 15,21,50,[52][53][54][55][56] In 1923 Bosanquet 52 incorporated in a momentum balance equation the contributions of inertial drag and viscous resistance counteracting the capillary pressure. The explanation proposed by Haneveld et al 33 seems to correspond to the negative velocity slip length in silica pores reported by Gruener et al 39 in experiments of water filling in networks of nanopores.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It offers the advantages of keeping the fractal nature of the oil‐gas interface, which could be compared with microscopic observations. Four important constraints were explicitly considered: (1) the threshold of percolation in honeycomb structures, (2) the immiscible displacement of air and oil, (3) the presence of buoyancy forces, (4) the pressure ahead the oil meniscus . By reusing several concepts previously devised to describe diffusive phenomena at supramolecular scale or to solve transport equations when all parameters are known by their distributions, we show that the distributions of filling times and first‐passage times can be parametrized from the main physical quantities (number of layers, size of defects, presence of air, etc.).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two different ways to model the entrapped gas action are available in literature: the first, given by the following formula Ω(MathClass-punc,L)MathClass-rel=paMathClass-bin−paLLMathClass-bin−1emnbspMathClass-punc, is due to Deutsch , p a here is the atmospheric pressure; the second, according to Zhmud et al , Chibbaro or Hultmark et al , takes into account only the viscous drag produced by the entrapped gas as follows: Ω(MathClass-punc,L)MathClass-rel=MathClass-bin−8μg(LMathClass-bin−)R2dℓdtMathClass-bin−ddt[]ρg(LMathClass-bin−)dℓdt1emnbspMathClass-punc, where μ g and ρ g are the viscosity and density of the entrapped gas, respectively. Let us remark that those authors usually take μ g ≪ μ .…”
Section: Mathematical Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…is due to Deutsch [30], p a here is the atmospheric pressure; the second, according to Zhmud et al [20], Chibbaro [8] or Hultmark et al [32], takes into account only the viscous drag produced by the entrapped gas as follows:…”
Section: Entrapped Gas Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%