Talk:Capillary pressure

Untitled
A short comment to the proposed merge with the page on the Young-Laplace equation:

Capillary pressure is obviously more general than the cases covered by this equation, implying that material may be moved from there into the present page. The Young-Laplace equation is however prominent enough to have its own article.

--Paslotte (talk) 20:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Capillary pressure is not specific to hydrocarbon systems. The equations talks about wetting and non-wetting fluids, but the text mentions "hydrocarbons", "oil" and "water". Needs to be made consistent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.102.153.1 (talk) 17:03, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

The "in porous media" section is redundant because the definition is exactly the same as the fluid statics case. Its inclusion is not useful and it should be removed.128.83.76.112 (talk) 16:23, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

The first section of the article needs to include citations, and some of the information in that section is worded very similarly to that on the page that comes up through the "Capillary pressure equations" link in the References section (which also does not provide citations). The article could elaborate more on the validity of the Young-Laplace equation and capillary equilibrium (e.g. why they are related). This article could also include more information on capillary pressure in non-porous media (e.g. where else does capillary pressure apply?) and why understanding capillary pressure is significant. One of the references, "Electrochemical Oxygen Technology", for example, does not provide any of the described information on capillary pressures, but discusses an application(s) that could be further explained in the article.

AmandaLevenson (talk) 08:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AmandaLevenson. Peer reviewers: Krbuw, Ebeginnings.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Deepwater Horizon
The entire paragraph referring to the Deepwater Horizon accident should be removed. The opening sentence of this paragraph says that capillary pressure was important in the accident, which is factually incorrect. None of the sources provided in the paragraph support the claims made in the paragraph. 178.164.124.33 (talk) 21:28, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Misc. notes
Potential Additions to Article

In editing this article, I would like to include more examples of capillary pressure in a variety of applications and occurrences, primarily in the following:

1. Biomedical applications (i.e. microfluidics)

2. Environmental/energy sector (i.e. rocks, oil)

3. Nature (i.e. biological and environmental)

Potential Sources

The list of sources below includes books and journals that I am considering using to cover the previously mentioned range of capillary pressure-related applications. They explain/discuss how capillary pressure plays a role/is analyzed in various systems, and/or how these systems impact capillary pressure.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

AmandaLevenson (talk) 23:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review
Peer review of capillary pressure by Ebeginnings

For the first equation It would be most helpful to define p_c, as the capillary pressure as well as the other variables. In the first paragraph it may be beneficial to do a introduction that doesn't have as much jargon. This would be helpful for those who visit the page without an immediate knowledge of the technical terms.

The microfluidics paragraph is very succinctly written, and conveys the underlying purpose well. Good use of a real life example of microfluidic devices.

Looking at the structure of the article, I would recommend a section of history or example calculations to separate the introduction from the applications.

The table of various ways to calculate capillary pressure is user-friendly and links to other content that can be researched. Good job.

The term capillary pressure and its' effect on capillary blood flow is fascinating, and gives the article substance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebeginnings (talk • contribs) 00:04, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review
-Very well written introduction to the topic (could be made a little more elementary).

-Great work finding such interesting examples!

-In "Needle Ice" sources should be given for Taber and Beskow's work.

-Give some context for the Brooks-Corey correlation.

-Give more mention to take-home pregnancy tests, that's an example that more people would know of than even needle ice.

-Link to pages describing the capillary pressure measurement methods, if they exist. If not, maybe a short explanation would be useful?

Of these suggestions, the most important is probably citing Taber and Beskow.

BlakeC90 (talk) 05:05, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review
This is a very well written and comprehensive article. I like how there are many real world examples and the equations are integrated into the example sections. I appreciate the frequent and high quality citations and the links to other relevant Wikipedia articles. The article adds value and is well connected to the fluid mechanics sphere of Wikipedia. The description of the difference between capillary pressure and fluid moving on a wetable surface was phrased well and informative. The article's tone matches the Wikipedia formula well. Grammar and formatting are well done. Good use of image addition with the needle ice photo. A diagram explaining the topic would be helpful.

The lead section would benefit from not including equations or detailed descriptions. The lead section can focus on a straightforward introduction and summary to the topic, and a new section can discuss the general details and provide even more equations. The body of the article is applications with technical descriptions built in, but a section that just focuses on the theory of capillary pressure would make a good first body section. A simple improvement would be labeling the variables of equations in a list made in the formula editor rather than plain text in a paragraph. By labeling the variables in the formal editor and putting them in a bullet list, readers visually connect the variable definitions to the equations.

Krbuw (talk) 07:19, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Response to Peer Reviews
(The following changes I made are listed in order of their respective peer review suggestions on the Talk page)

1. In the introductory sentence, I described capillary pressure as (p_c) so that it is more easily identifiable/understandable throughout the rest of the article. I also moved the equations to a separate section, leaving the introductory part brief and broad for non-technical audiences.

2. I added citations for Taber and Beskow's work (I found their work through the source I originally used to discuss their findings).

3. The Brooks-Corey correlation was in the article prior to my contributions. The article that was cited for that section did not provide the information that was stated, so I have cut this part out and will potentially add it back in for my final draft once I find more background on it.

4. In the section about the take-home pregnancy test, I added a little more terminology to describe the test (e.g. lateral flow, point-of-care), and briefly discussed advantages/disadvantages to the device platform. I am trying to get approval for a published diagram of capillary action in a lateral flow test (I think most people can envision a take-home pregnancy test but I feel like this would help better connect it with the concepts in this article).

5. I added short explanations to the capillary pressure measurement methods in the petrochemical industry and will continue to elaborate on these methods as I finalize my contributions to this article (e.g. adding diagrams of the methods).

6. I created and added four diagrams to help explain the various properties or equations that are described in the article.

7. I added a "Theory" section that describes the overarching definition of capillary pressure and some of the properties involved in capillary pressure calculations (e.g. wettability) preceding the section that includes a few variations of the capillary pressure equation. However, I think this could also suffice as one “Definition” section.

8. I defined the variables for all the equations in a list instead of in the body paragraphs.

I also have a few notes on things I’ve noticed I still need to add/fix:

1. Add section (or mention) about sample (e.g. blood) filtration to Microfluidics

2. Add examples of petroleum projects that have utilized the mentioned methods (or examples of notable engineers involved?)

3. Add pictures to the petrochemical industry section

AmandaLevenson (talk) 23:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)