Surfactant Effects on Crystal Growth Dynamics and Crystal Morphology of Methane Hydrate Formed at Gas/Liquid Interface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents visual observations aiming to clarify the underlying physics of surfactant effects on clathrate hydrate crystal growth at the interface between methane gas and water with surfactant. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), which is commonly used in industrial processes, was used in this study. Various SDS mass fractions from 0 to w SDS = 100 ppm with a step of size 10 ppm were examined, where w SDS represents the mass fraction of SDS aqueous solution. The crystal growth behavior and the crystal morphology of the methane hydrate at the interface varied depending on surfactant concentration and Δ T sub . In systems with w SDS ≤ 20 ppm, the nucleation occurred on the droplet surface (gas/liquid interface), then grew laterally, and finally covered the whole droplet surface. On the contrary, at w SDS ≥ 30 ppm, the droplet shape was not maintained and enhanced hydrate crystal growth was observed compared to those systems with w SDS ≤ 20 ppm. Individual hydrate crystals at w SDS = 20 ppm were observed to be smaller than those in a pure water system at a given Δ T sub, which is ascribed to the enhanced hydrate nucleation by the addition of SDS.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".