Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
ArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneous
Discussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK Scuba
DirectoryScuba Clubs

Scuba Forum / General / December 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Capillary Rise

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
deplifer@gmail.com - 07 Dec 2005 21:24 GMT
· Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
the wetting angle. Which forces act on
the water column?

· What happens if the tube is horizontal?
mike gray - 08 Dec 2005 02:02 GMT
> · Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
> liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
> the wetting angle. Which forces act on
> the water column?

As every diver learns,  h={{2T\cos{\theta}}\over{\rho g r}}

where

    T = surface tension (J/m²)
    θ = contact angle
    ρ = density of liquid (kg/m3)
    g = acceleration due to gravity (m/s²)
    r = radius of tube (m)

> · What happens if the tube is horizontal?

As every perfectly horizontal DIR diver learns, g = 0 and theta
cannot be calculated; there is no capillarity.

Thank you for visiting rec.scuba, the ultimate source of
knowledge of things wet.

esg
mike gray - 08 Dec 2005 02:27 GMT
>> · Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
>> liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
>> the wetting angle. Which forces act on
>> the water column?
>
> As every diver learns,  h={{2T\cos{\theta}}\over{\rho g r}}

That didn't come out the way I wrote it. Damn browser!

h = 2T cos theta / p g r

and that's why we use pressure instead of capillary gauges
JOF - 08 Dec 2005 02:32 GMT
>>> · Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
>>> liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
>and that's why we use pressure instead of capillary gauges

Sheesh. That's all greek to me.

JF
bob crownfield - 08 Dec 2005 04:16 GMT
>>>> · Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
>>>> liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> Sheesh. That's all greek to me.

almost! so close.

if you had said "thats all geek to me"
that would have been LOTDA material.

> JF
chilly - 08 Dec 2005 06:48 GMT
> >>> · Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
> >>> liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Sheesh. That's all greek to me.

Very large Greek letters though on this reader.
Lee Bell - 08 Dec 2005 10:31 GMT
>> · Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
>> liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> Thank you for visiting rec.scuba, the ultimate source of knowledge of
> things wet.

The radius of the tube becomes infinite and the capillarity approaches 0
asymptotically.

Lee
mike gray - 08 Dec 2005 13:53 GMT
>>>· What happens if the tube is horizontal?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> The radius of the tube becomes infinite and the capillarity approaches 0
> asymptotically.

That's the stroke explanation.

m
Lee Bell - 08 Dec 2005 23:40 GMT
>>>>· What happens if the tube is horizontal?
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> That's the stroke explanation.

You expected anything else?

Lee
JOF - 08 Dec 2005 21:47 GMT
>The radius of the tube becomes infinite and the capillarity approaches 0
>asymptotically.

Okay. I got it, I think.

So we're talking about a really really fat dooby, and as the paper
quality increases the simpler it tokes?

How'd I do?

JF
Lee Bell - 08 Dec 2005 23:42 GMT
>>The radius of the tube becomes infinite and the capillarity approaches 0
>>asymptotically.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> How'd I do?

Not very well.  Capillarity only refers to liquids.  He was using a bong.

Lee
JOF - 09 Dec 2005 00:04 GMT
>>>The radius of the tube becomes infinite and the capillarity approaches 0
>>>asymptotically.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>Not very well.  Capillarity only refers to liquids.  He was using a bong.

Okay. A bong with a paper filter. I'm sure Fram must make something
suitable for inline use.

JF
Lee Bell - 09 Dec 2005 13:24 GMT
>>> How'd I do?
>>
>>Not very well.  Capillarity only refers to liquids.  He was using a bong.
>
> Okay. A bong with a paper filter. I'm sure Fram must make something
> suitable for inline use.

Better.
chilly - 09 Dec 2005 13:41 GMT
> >>> How'd I do?
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Better.

I dunno.  When we were kids, we always enjoyed the u joint from a vacuun
cleaner and some tinfoil with holes poked in it.

Um, what were talking about?

Oh yeah, and let us not leave out The Who.

"Don't get fooled again . . ."  (song lyrics)
JOF - 09 Dec 2005 17:54 GMT
>I dunno.  When we were kids, we always enjoyed the u joint from a vacuun
>cleaner and some tinfoil with holes poked in it.

TMI kiddo. There might be impressionable kids lurking.

JF
chilly - 09 Dec 2005 18:29 GMT
> >I dunno.  When we were kids, we always enjoyed the u joint from a vacuun
> >cleaner and some tinfoil with holes poked in it.
> >
> TMI kiddo. There might be impressionable kids lurking.

You actually think a kid(s) would be interested in following the diatribes
around here?
JOF - 09 Dec 2005 19:55 GMT
>> >I dunno.  When we were kids, we always enjoyed the u joint from a vacuun
>> >cleaner and some tinfoil with holes poked in it.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>You actually think a kid(s) would be interested in following the diatribes
>around here?

There's always the monologues.

JF
Scott - 09 Dec 2005 23:39 GMT
> > >I dunno.  When we were kids, we always enjoyed the u joint from a vacuun
> > >cleaner and some tinfoil with holes poked in it.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> You actually think a kid(s) would be interested in following the diatribes
> around here?

Why not?

Keeps you and John perched on your seats.
Grumman-581 - 09 Dec 2005 19:22 GMT
> TMI kiddo. There might be impressionable kids lurking.

Nawh, the WebTV weenies don't stay around that long... Plus, they're too
dumb to be impressionable...
Dillon Pyron - 11 Dec 2005 03:46 GMT
>> TMI kiddo. There might be impressionable kids lurking.
>
>Nawh, the WebTV weenies don't stay around that long... Plus, they're too
>dumb to be impressionable...

The only impression I seem to make is when I press my thumb on the
soft spot on their skulls.  (trivia, it's called a fontanel)
Signature

dillon

666 permissions of the beast

Dillon Pyron - 11 Dec 2005 03:44 GMT
>> >>> How'd I do?
>> >>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>I dunno.  When we were kids, we always enjoyed the u joint from a vacuun
>cleaner and some tinfoil with holes poked in it.

Toilet paper roll and foil.  When you're done, burn the puppy, no
evidence.

>Um, what were talking about?

I don't have the foggiest.  I've never been convicted of doing
anything illegal in my life.

>Oh yeah, and let us not leave out The Who.
>
>"Don't get fooled again . . ."  (song lyrics)
>
Signature

dillon

666 permissions of the beast

Lee Bell - 11 Dec 2005 13:58 GMT
> I don't have the foggiest.  I've never been convicted of doing
> anything illegal in my life.

No tickets?
Dillon Pyron - 12 Dec 2005 17:12 GMT
> > I don't have the foggiest.  I've never been convicted of doing
>> anything illegal in my life.
>
>No tickets?

Defensive driving.
Signature

dillon

666 permissions of the beast

Lee Bell - 12 Dec 2005 22:50 GMT
> Defensive driving.

What caliber?

Lee
Dillon Pyron - 14 Dec 2005 02:24 GMT
>> Defensive driving.
>
>What caliber?
>
>Lee

.40 S&W, of course.
Signature

dillon

666 permissions of the beast

Lee Bell - 14 Dec 2005 15:20 GMT
>>> Defensive driving.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> .40 S&W, of course.

8^)

I like my .40 Glock pretty well, but I still much prefer my Beretta 92-F
9mm.  It's simply the best autoloader I've ever owned.  Unfortunately, it's
not even close to concealable.

Lee
Grumman-581 - 14 Dec 2005 16:35 GMT
> I like my .40 Glock pretty well, but I still much prefer my Beretta 92-F
> 9mm.  It's simply the best autoloader I've ever owned.  Unfortunately, it's
> not even close to concealable.

That's because you're in Florida... If you were in Canada during the winter,
it would be concealable... But then the issue becomes being able to operate
it while wearing mittens...
Lee Bell - 14 Dec 2005 18:39 GMT
> That's because you're in Florida... If you were in Canada during the
> winter,
> it would be concealable... But then the issue becomes being able to
> operate
> it while wearing mittens...

I could always throw it.

It's not likely that I'll ever have it in Canada.  You see, I'm not a
Canadian and only Canadians are smuggling guns into Canada.

Lee
Scott - 11 Dec 2005 14:39 GMT
> I don't have the foggiest.  I've never been convicted of doing
> anything illegal in my life.

Convicted.

Recently a law was passed prohibiting the smoking of tobacco in a park I
used to sit in with my friends and openly smoke weed.

Back then, it was a $100 fine to posess an ounce. If you had a quarter
ounce, the fine was $25, half ounce $50, etc. Unless you were being an
a.shole, the cops didnt care. We would sit there on the grass, pass a bowl
and the cops would stroll right on by.

The only way you ever got a ticket was if you were stupid, caught their eye,
pissed them off, they had nothing else on you, and you smoked bunk. If you
had good herb they'd let you go with a stern warning. Cops always had the
best stash.

The fine for smoking tobacco in the park is now $250.

Gives me the warm and fuzzies, like I got away with something...
Greg Mossman - 11 Dec 2005 17:27 GMT
> Back then, it was a $100 fine to posess an ounce.

Basically that's it in "decriminalized" states.  In Washington, it's a
misdemeanor and people convicted of misdemeanors there are required to be
incarcerated a minimum of 24 hours and fined a minimum of $250.  You're
better off switching to tobacco for illegal smoking in your park.

In California, it used to be considered an "infraction", similar to a
traffic ticket.  Now it's called a misdemeanor, but still treated like an
infraction - i.e., you just get a ticket instead of getting arrested and the
maximum fine is $100.  For a while (when a Republican ran the place) we were
subject to the federal requirement that one convicted of simple possession
lose his driver's license for 6 months.  In California, that's almost as bad
as a death sentence.  Fortunately one of the many great things accomplished
by Gray Davis was letting the law expire - now California is considered to
have opted out of the federal law, just like Washington, and our driver's
licenses are secure unless we actually get caught driving under the
influence.  Arnie isn't likely to change the status quo since he's an old
pothead.

When I become President, I will nominate Tommy Chong to be my drug czar and,
instead of universal health care, we'll promote universal medical marijuana.
Even if people are too poor to afford adequate health care, at least they'll
be too stoned to care.
Dillon Pyron - 08 Dec 2005 04:50 GMT
>· Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
>liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
>the wetting angle. Which forces act on
>the water column?
>
>· What happens if the tube is horizontal?

For those who don't know, finals are next week.  Looks like somebody
blew off a couple weeks of chemistry.
Signature

dillon

666 permissions of the beast

Keith - 09 Dec 2005 23:22 GMT
· Describe the capillary rise of a wetting
liquid in a vertical capillary tube. Define
the wetting angle. Which forces act on
the water column?

· What happens if the tube is horizontal?

it runs all over the floor ;0)
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.