New insight into cavitation mechanisms in high-capacity tensiometers based on high-speed photography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The high-capacity tensiometer developed by Ridley and Burland in 1993 is a milestone in experimental unsaturated soil mechanics. This device, which relies on development of tension in an enclosed water body, permits direct measurement of negative water potential. Many tensiometers have been built since 1993, all being based on the same principle although the design may differ slightly from the original. In particular, the common characteristic is a very small water reservoir that is believed to be the location of bubble nucleation, a phenomenon referred to as cavitation that impedes the sensor from functioning properly. Many have studied cavitation and different explanations or cavitation mechanisms have been proposed. However, all the considerations put forward were derived without being able to capture what happened inside the water reservoir at cavitation. This is now achieved with the new tensiometer specifically designed to “see” inside the water reservoir during suction measurement. For the first time, cavitation has been captured via high-speed photography and the mechanisms of cavitation can be explained using physical evidence. The first outcome is that it is possible for a high-capacity tensiometer to function to its full range with a large water reservoir. Then, the analysis of high-speed photographs reveals that the bubbles triggering cavitation are nucleated in the ceramic and make their way to the water reservoir. Cavitation occurs only when the air phase reaches the water reservoir.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".