合作客戶(hù)/
拜耳公司 |
同濟(jì)大學(xué) |
聯(lián)合大學(xué) |
美國(guó)保潔 |
美國(guó)強(qiáng)生 |
瑞士羅氏 |
相關(guān)新聞Info
-
> 0.01mg是什么精度的天平？超微量天平的稱(chēng)重范圍
> UV油墨印刷的領(lǐng)域及印刷工藝適應(yīng)性
> 一文了解什么是?馬蘭格尼效應(yīng)及其原理、現(xiàn)象和工程應(yīng)用
> 便攜式自動(dòng)表面張力儀主要技術(shù)特征
> 表面張力和重力驅(qū)動(dòng)下液態(tài)釬料填充焊縫流動(dòng)模型構(gòu)建及效果評(píng)估（三）
> 多相凝聚體系的界面張力計(jì)算方法及研究進(jìn)展
> 表面活性劑是否對(duì)斥水性土壤的潤(rùn)濕性有影響？——概括、介紹
> 細(xì)胞培養(yǎng)基的理化性質(zhì)粘滯性及表面張力的內(nèi)容
> 新煙堿類(lèi)殺蟲(chóng)劑發(fā)展概述
> 燒結(jié)礦致密化行為研究：不同堿度條件下熔體的表面張力、表觀黏度值（三）
推薦新聞Info
-
> 界面張力主導(dǎo)：殘余氣飽和度的深部咸水層CO2封存潛力評(píng)估（三）
> 界面張力主導(dǎo)：殘余氣飽和度的深部咸水層CO2封存潛力評(píng)估（二）
> 界面張力主導(dǎo)：殘余氣飽和度的深部咸水層CO2封存潛力評(píng)估（一）
> 兩類(lèi)農(nóng)用防霧涂層表面張力的深度計(jì)算與比較分析（二）
> 兩類(lèi)農(nóng)用防霧涂層表面張力的深度計(jì)算與比較分析（一）
> 藥液表面張力、噴霧方法對(duì)霧滴在水稻植株上沉積的影響（三）
> 藥液表面張力、噴霧方法對(duì)霧滴在水稻植株上沉積的影響（二）
> 藥液表面張力、噴霧方法對(duì)霧滴在水稻植株上沉積的影響（一）
> 烷基二苯醚/烷基苯混合磺酸鹽靜態(tài)表面張力、金屬腐蝕性及凈洗力測(cè)定（二）
> 烷基二苯醚/烷基苯混合磺酸鹽靜態(tài)表面張力、金屬腐蝕性及凈洗力測(cè)定（一）
表面活性劑是否對(duì)斥水性土壤的潤(rùn)濕性有影響？——結(jié)論、致謝！
來(lái)源：上海謂載 瀏覽 1872 次 發(fā)布時(shí)間:2021-11-09
結(jié)論
不像人工創(chuàng)造的穩(wěn)定的驅(qū)蟲(chóng)表面或多孔 介質(zhì)，拒水土壤表現(xiàn)出潤(rùn)濕動(dòng)力學(xué)，由此 最初疏水的土壤隨著時(shí)間的推移變得親水 與水接觸時(shí)。 初始潤(rùn)濕動(dòng)力學(xué) 排斥土壤通常歸因于 固液界面能 (γSL)，或液汽界面能 (γLV) 的降低，或兩者兼而有之。 γLV 的減少 建議是由于土壤表面溶解 活性有機(jī)化合物進(jìn)入與水接觸的水中 土壤。 在這項(xiàng)研究中，我們測(cè)試了土傳表面的影響 潤(rùn)濕動(dòng)力學(xué)的活性物質(zhì)，并發(fā)現(xiàn)，與廣為接受的范式相反，土壤釋放表面 活性化合物不會(huì)加速潤(rùn)濕過(guò)程。 因此很明顯，固體界面能的變化 表面（γSL 或 γSV），而不是液汽 表面 (γLV) 必須在驅(qū)動(dòng)不穩(wěn)定排斥性土壤的潤(rùn)濕動(dòng)力學(xué)方面起主導(dǎo)作用。
致謝
本研究由以色列農(nóng)業(yè)部資助 和農(nóng)村發(fā)展，資助號(hào) 821-0088-04。
參考
Barrett, G. & Slaymaker, O. 1989. Identification, characterization, and hydrological implications of water repellency in mountain soils, southern British-Columbia. Catena, 16, 477–489.
Bisdom, E.B.A., Dekker, L.W. & Schoute, J.F.T. 1993. Water repellency of sieve fractions from sandy soils and relationships with organic material and soil structure. Geoderma, 56, 105–118.
Chen, Y. & Schnitzer, M. 1978. Surface-tension of aqueous-solutions of soil humic substances. Soil Science, 125, 7–15.
Dekker, L.W., Oostindie, K. & Ritsema, C.J. 2005. Exponential increase of publications related to soil water repellency. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 43, 403–441.
Dinar, E., Taraniuk, I., Graber, E.R., Katsman, S., Moise, T., Anttila, T. et al. 2006. Cloud condensation nuclei properties of model and atmospheric HULIS. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 6, 2465–2481.
Doerr, S.H., Shakesby, R.A. & Walsh, R.P.D. 2000. Soil water repellency: its causes, characteristics and hydro-geomorphological significance. Earth-Science Reviews, 51, 33–65.
Doerr, S.H., Dekker, L.W., Ritsema, C.J., Shakesby, R.A. & Bryant, R. 2002. Water repellency of soils: the influence of ambient relative humidity. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 66, 401–405.
Ellerbrock, R.H., Gerke, H.H., Bachmann, J. & Goebel, M.O. 2005. Composition of organic matter fractions for explaining wettability of three forest soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 69, 57–66.
Feng, G.L., Letey, J. & Wu, L. 2002. The influence of two surfactants on infiltration into a water-repellent soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 66, 361–367.
Gee, G.W. & Bauder, J.W. 1986. Particle-size analysis. In: Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Monograph No 9 (ed. A. Klute), pp. 383–411.
American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI. Graber, E.R., Ben-Arie, O. & Wallach, R. 2006. Effect of sample disturbance on soil water repellency determination in sandy soils. Geoderma, 136, 11–19.
Hurrass, J. & Schaumann, G.E. 2006. Properties of soil organic matter and aqueous extracts of actually water repellent and wettable soil samples. Geoderma, 132, 222–239.
Letey, J. 1969. Measurement of contact angle, water drop penetration time, and critical surface tension. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Water Repellent Soils 6–8 May 1968 (eds L.F. DeBano & J.F. Letey), pp. 43–47. University of California, Riverside, CA. Letey, J., Carrillo, M.L.K. & Pang, X.P. 2000. Approaches to characterize the degree of water repellency. Journal of Hydrology, 231–232, 61–65.
Ma'shum, M. & Farmer, V.C. 1985. Origin and assessment of water repellency of a sandy South Australian soil. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 23, 623–626.
Roy, J.L. & McGill, W.B. 2002. Assessing soil water repellency using the molarity of ethanol droplet (MED) test. Soil Science, 167, 83–97.
Tschapek, M. 1984. Criteria for determining the hydrophilicityhydrophobicity of soils. Zeitschrift fu¨r Pflanzenerna¨hrung und Bodenkunde, 147, 137–149.
Walkley, A. & Black, I.A. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter and a proposed modifi- cation of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science, 37, 29–38. Wallach, R. & Graber, E.R. 2007. Effluent irrigation-induced soil water repellency: time dependent variation of infiltration rate and of water repellency at different levels of ambient relative humidity. Hydrological Processes, 21, 2346–2355.
Wallach, R., Ben-Arie, O. & Graber, E.R. 2005. Soil water repellency induced by long-term irrigation with treated sewage effluent. Journal of Environmental Quality, 34, 1910–1920.
Wallis, M.G. & Horne, D.J. 1992. Soil water repellency. Advances in Soil Science, 20, 91–140.
表面活性劑是否對(duì)斥水性土壤的潤(rùn)濕性有影響？——概括、介紹
表面活性劑是否對(duì)斥水性土壤的潤(rùn)濕性有影響？——材料和方法