Source of Temperature and Pressure Pulsations during Sessile Droplet Evaporation into Multicomponent Atmospheres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During sessile droplet evaporation, studies with IR thermography and shadowgraphs have indicated temperature pulsations. We confirm those observations with microthermocouples, but microthermocouples also indicate temperature pulsations in the atmosphere of the droplet. The pressure in this atmosphere pulsated as well and was correlated with the temperature pulsations in the droplet. Also, we find that if a droplet evaporates into its own vapor, there are no temperature or pressure pulsations. The pulsations occur only if the droplet evaporates into an atmosphere with a component having a heat of solution with the droplet when it adsorbs-absorbs. None of the currently proposed mechanisms for the temperature pulsations provide an explanation for the coupling between the temperature pulsations in the droplet and the vapor-phase pressure pulsations, and for the absence of the pulsations when the system is single-component. As a mechanism for the pulsations, we propose that when a droplet is exposed to an atmosphere containing a component that has a heat of solution with the droplet, energy will be released from adsorption-absorption. This energy will cause pulsations in the evaporation flux, and these pulsations could cause the observed temperature and pressure pulsations. We examine this mechanism by showing that, if the measured temperature pulsations in a water droplet exposed to a methanol atmosphere are used as the input to a theory of evaporation kinetics (statistical rate theory), the pressure pulsations of the water vapor in the methanol atmosphere are predicted and agree with those measured with a quadrupole mass analyzer. When the inputs and outputs are reversed in the theory, we find that the temperature pulsations in the droplet are correctly predicted from the measured water vapor pulsations in the atmosphere.
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".