Thermocapillary transport of energy during water evaporation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When evaporation occurs at a spherical water-vapor interface maintained at the circular mouth of a small funnel, studies of the energy transport have indicated that thermal conduction alone does not provide enough energy to evaporate the liquid at the observed rate. If the Gibbs model of the interface is adopted and the "surface-thermal capacity" is assigned a value of 30.6+/-0.8 kJ/(m2 K), then for evaporation experiments with the interfacial temperature in the range -10 degrees C< or =TLV< or =3.5 degrees C and Marangoni number (Ma) in the range 100<Ma<22,000, it was found that if energy transport by both thermocapillary convection and thermal conduction were taken into account, conservation of energy was fully satisfied. The question addressed herein is whether the assigned value of the surface-thermal capacity is an ad hoc empirical parameter or a property of the water-vapor interface that can be used in other circumstances. Accordingly, a series of experiments has been conducted in which water evaporated at cylindrical interfaces that were, on average, 4.4 times larger in area than that of the spherical interfaces used to measure the surface-thermal capacity initially. It is shown that using the value of the surface-thermal capacity determined at a spherical interface, the energy transported by thermocapillary convection and thermal conduction at a cylindrical interface is sufficient to evaporate the liquid at the observed rate. Knowing the value of the surface-thermal capacity also allows the local evaporation flux to be calculated from the measured temperature profiles in the liquid and vapor phases. The calculated local evaporation flux can then be used with statistical rate theory to calculate the vapor-phase pressure along the interface. The predicted mean vapor-phase pressure is in close agreement with that measured, and the predicted pressure gradient is consistent with that expected when thermocapillary convection is present.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".