Universality of a surface tension—contact‐angle relation for hydrophobic soils of different texture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wettability of soil affects a wide variety of processes in soils like infiltration, percolation, preferential flow, and surface runoff. Even though efforts have been made to determine contact angles and surface tension or energy of smooth surfaces, the determination on granular materials like soil particles remains unsolved. One objective of this study was to test the consistency of contact angles (CA) measured with the newly modified and easy‐to‐apply Wilhelmy plate method by using solid particles and liquids with defined variations of surface tension. A second objective was to derive basic physical surface properties for the irregularly shaped and chemically heterogeneous soil particles. Advancing contact angles were determined by using model soils varying in texture from clay to coarse sand to check the impact of grain size on the CA measurements. Varying the solid‐surface tension with dichlorodimethlylsilane treatments provided for pure‐water wetting stages ranging from wettable to extremely hydrophobic. The surface tensions of the liquids were varied from 72 mN m–1 to 25 mN m–1 by using water or water‐ethanol mixtures. The surface tensions of the model soils were determined with the zero degree–contact angle method following Zisman's critical–surface tension concept. Results show that the measured CA varied continuously with the variations of the surface tension of the liquid and the solid phase, respectively. A general interpretation of the results is possible by using the concept of the Equation of State Approach.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".