Influence of surfactants on unsaturated water flow and solute transport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Surfactants can reduce soil water retention by changing the surface tension of water and the contact angle between the liquid and solid phases. As a result, water flow and solute transport in unsaturated soil may be altered in the presence of surfactants. In this study, the effects of a representative nonionic surfactant, Triton X‐100, on coupled water flow and nonreactive solute transport during unsaturated flow conditions were evaluated. Batch reactor experiments were conducted to measure the surfactant sorption characteristics, while unsaturated transport experiments were performed in columns packed with 40–270 mesh Ottawa sand at five initial water contents. Following the introduction of surfactant solution, the rate of water percolation through the sand increased; however, this period of rapid water drainage was followed by decreased water percolation due to the reduction in soil water content and the corresponding decrease in unsaturated hydraulic conductivity behind the surfactant front. The observed changes in water percolation occurred sequentially, and resulted in faster nonreactive solute transport than was observed in the absence of surfactant. A one‐dimensional mathematical model accurately described coupled water flow, surfactant, and solute transport under most experimental conditions. Differences between model predictions and experimental data were observed in the column study performed at the lowest water content (0.115 cm 3 /cm 3 ), which was attributed to surfactant adsorption at the air‐water interface. These findings demonstrate the potential influence of surfactants additives on unsaturated water flow and solute transport in soils, and demonstrate a methodology to couple these processes in a predictive modeling tool.
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 | 0.001 | 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".