Dependence of streaming potential on grain diameter and pore throat radius
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Helmholtz-Smoluchowski (HS) equation is commonly used to relate the streaming potential coupling coefficient of porous media to a range of pore fluid parameters and the zeta potential of the rock. It contains no implicit dependence upon grain size, pore size or pore throat size. We have developed a form of the HS equation that depends on grain size, and compared it with another model, the conventional HS equation and the only previously available experimental data. While the standard HS model cannot match the data, either of the other two models can. Recognising the sparseness of experimental data, we have measured the streaming potential coupling coefficient for 12 sizes of bead and two fluid salinities. The new experimental data show that while both non-conventional models fit the new data very well, the model developed in this work is better when the model has no adjustable parameters. We have also developed equations that describe how the coupling coefficient varies with pore diameter and pore throat diameter. We have compared experimental determinations as a function of pore throat diameter with the new model and found it to match very well if the ratio of the mean pore diameter to the pore throat diameter is 1.627, which is valid for random distribution of monodisperse spheres. The zeta potential has been calculated from both models and found to be approximately constant and in agreement with the theoretically predicted values. This work provides relationships for the variation of streaming potential coupling coefficient as a function of (i) grain size, (ii) pore radius, and (iii) pore throat diameter (for cubic, tetragonal and random packing), as well as a high quality dataset of streaming potential coupling coefficients as a function of grain size, pore radius and pore throat diameter.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".