Water Potential and Aggregate Size Effects on Contact Angle and Surface Energy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil wettability affects hydrological processes like infiltration, percolation, preferential flow, and surface runoff. Wettability is related to the soil‐water contact angle, which in turn depends on the solid surface free energy. Little is known, however, about contact angles and their dependence on soil water potential. The main objective of this study was therefore to investigate the dynamics of contact angle due to variation of the water potential. Aggregate fractions of 2‐ to 4‐, 1‐ to 2‐, and <1‐mm diameter and corresponding homogenized material of a subcritical water repellent Orthic Luvisol were studied at water potentials of −1000, −154, −30, and −0.14 MPa. Wettability was assessed in terms of the advancing contact angle by the capillary rise method (CRM). Additionally, we calculated the surface free energy. Results showed, that the contact angle increased as water potential increased to a specific level. It was found for several soil samples, that above this water potential level, the contact angle decreased again. The change of contact angle due to variation of water potential reached nearly 90° for one sample. Contact angles of homogenized fractions were slightly larger than those measured for the aggregate surfaces. Surface free energy was consistently between 55 and 65 mJ m −2 with relative contributions of the dispersion and polar components to surface free energy of approximately 1/3 and 2/3, respectively. We conclude, that the assessment and physical description of the specific water potential for which a surface becomes wettable is a key factor for a better understanding of soil wetting.
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.
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 it