Abstract
Influences of an applied magnetic field and an applied field gradient are explored in pure water and in aqueous solutions. Effects such as diamagnetic levitation require a large magnetic field gradient force, and very large inhomogeneous fields. The weak effects on surface tension are best observed in compensated zero-susceptibility solutions of paramagnetic ions. Much larger effects of magnetic field on evaporation rate, in the range 10–100% may be of either sign. They are related to behaviour of the ortho and para nuclear isomers of water as quasi-independent gasses in the vapor, which are released from the surface of evaporating water in a ratio that is far from the expected equilibrium 3:1 triplet/singlet ratio in the ambient atmosphere. For pure water the ratio is found to be 39:61 The equilibrium is slow to be established by intermolecular collisions, but the ratio can be changed rapidly in the vapor phase, for example by a magnetic field gradient due to Larmour precession, which in turn alters the evaporation rate. The field is most effective in when the vapor is confined in a sheltered space such as a microchannel.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download chapter PDF
1 Introduction
The influence of a magnetic field B (measured in Tesla) on condensed matter depends on the nature of the field, whether homogeneous or inhomogeneous, static or dynamic. The simultaneous application of an electric field E (measured in Vm−1) creates a dielectric polarization or excites an electric current that can modify the magnetic response. In this chapter, our focus is on the response of water and aqueous solutions to homogeneous and inhomogeneous static magnetic fields. B is the fundamental divergenceless magnetic field with no sources or sinks. The magnetic response of condensed matter however is determined by a different field, the local magnetic field strength H. The two are related by the equation,
where µ0 is the magnetic constant 4π 10–7 TmA−1, and the magnetization M is the magnetic moment per unit volume of condensed matter. Units of H and M are both Am−1; an equivalent unit for M is JT−1 m−3, based on the expression for the energy of a magnetic moment m (units Am2) in a field of B, E = − m.B JT−1.
1.1 Susceptibility
The basic response of water or aqueous solution to a field H is the appearance of an induced magnetization, proportional to the magnetic susceptibility χ of the liquid, defined by
M is isotropic and initially linear in field. Thus defined, susceptibility is a pure number, with no dimensions. The value for water is – 9.0 × 10−6, so water is diamagnetic with induced magnetization directed opposite to the applied field H0. The local magnetic field strength is related to H0 via a ‘demagnetizing’ factor that depends only on the shape of the sample with limits \( 0 \le {\mathcal{N}} \le 1 \).
Dividing Eq. 8.3 by H, it can be seen that H is actually bigger that H0 when χ is negative, but the difference for water is very small, and it can usually be neglected.
Other definitions of susceptibility are possible, where it is not dimensionless. Sometimes H0 is replaced by B0. Also cgs units (emu, Oersted and Gauss) may be encountered. The dimensionless cgs susceptibility is smaller than its SI counterpart by a factor 4π because µ0 = 1GOe−1 in the cgs system. Table 8.1 lists values for the susceptibility of water, together with its units, for different definitions to ease confusion when reading literature that does not use Eq. 8.1 and SI units. Besides the magnetic moment per unit volume used in our definition of χ, the magnetic moment per unit mass or per mole may be used instead. There is little temperature dependence for water; the susceptibility is found to increase by 1% in the range 1–80 ℃ due to a slight weakening of the hydrogen bonds [12, 48].
There are two notable magnetic consequences of the diamagnetic susceptibility of pure water in a non-uniform field. One is the Moses Effect [5], where a field is applied to region of water of depth d in an open bath. When a long bath of water is placed between the poles of an electromagnet, a small depression δ of the surface in the field is observed due to the magnetic pressure
exerted on the water. Equating this to the change in hydrostatic pressure δρg. The value of δ for µ0H = 1 T is just 360 µm. In 10 T, the effect rises to 3.6 cm. (The red sea is 3 km deep)
The other effect is diamagnetic levitation. A pendant droplet in a vertical magnetic field gradient ∇zB experiences an apparent change of weight due to the Kelvin force density, also known as the ‘magnetic field gradient force’ density FK = − (1/2µ0)χ ∇zB 2. The force will counterbalance the weight when − (1/µ0)B∇zB = − ρg, where ρ is the density of water. The numerical condition for levitation of water is therefore
It is possible to suspend water droplets and other objects composed mainly of water (frogs, strawberries ….) in stable equilibrium close to the top of an open bore of a Bitter magnet or superconducting solenoid where the field is nonuniform and ~ 20 T [56].
A further effect on a pendant or suspended water droplet is due to Maxwell stress. An applied field H0 induces a small uniform magnetization M in droplets of isotropic paramagnetic or diamagnetic liquids, as indicated in Fig. 8.1. The ‘demagnetizing’ effect can usually be neglected in water on account of its small susceptibility, although this is not the case in strongly paramagnetic ferrofluids with χ ~ 1, which minimize their total energy in the magnetic field by adopting spectacular spiked surfaces [54]. The pressure is not continuous at an interface between a liquid magnetized in a uniform field and vacuum, where a ‘magnetic normal traction’
2 Pendant Droplets
Fitting the shape of pendant liquid droplets captured in an optical contact analyser is a commonly used method to determine the surface tension of liquids. The pear-shape of the droplet is a consequence of equilibrium between gravitational and surface tension forces. Commercial optical droplet analysers fit the shape of the outline of a digital photographic image of the pendant droplet to a parametric equation from which surface tension γ is determined, given the liquid density ρ. Both vary with temperature, which should remain constant over the course of the measurement. To use the method to investigate magnetic field effects, permanent magnets are preferred to electromagnets, which have the drawbacks of heating and restricting access.
There are three ways a magnetic field could influence the shape of a pendant droplet.
-
(1)
Maxwell stress
-
(2)
A change in the surface tension of the liquid
-
(3)
Kelvin force in the direction of the field gradient when the field is non-uniform.
The first two effects can be produced by a uniform applied field, the third depends on the field gradient to provide partial magnetic levitation.
Maxwell stress. A uniform field H0 applied to a droplet of isotropic paramagnetic or diamagnetic liquid, induces a small uniform magnetization M = χH0, as indicated in Fig. 8.1c. The ‘demagnetizing’ effect can usually be neglected in water and dilute solutions of paramagnetic ions on account of their small susceptibility, although this is not the case in strongly paramagnetic ferrofluids with χ ~ 1, which minimize their total energy in the magnetic field by adopting the characteristic spiked surfaces described by Rosensweig. The pressure is not continuous at an interface between magnetized liquid and vacuum, where the magnetic normal traction of Eq. 8.6 appears in a direction perpendicular to the interface [54]. There is also a tangential component Sθ of the Maxwell stress in the Lorentz formulation, and the components as given by Datsyuk and Pavlyniuk [16] when the susceptibility is small are
The tangential component for water is the larger by five orders of magnitude (1/χ). Integrating the component of the normal stress in the z-direction of the magnetic field over a hemisphere the stress in the z-direction is (1/4)µ0M2. A consequence of the deformation of the magnetized droplet due to Maxwell stress is an increase in its surface area. The deformation δd/d of the in the direction of the field, where d is the droplet diameter is a function of the dimensionless quantity µ0M2d/4γ, where γ is the surface tension of the liquid and for small deformations of a pendant droplet they should be roughly equal. Hence, we can estimate that the deformation of a 4 mm pendant water droplet due to the normal Maxwell stress in 1 T as approximately 4.5 × 10–7. However, if we take account of the z-component of the tangential Maxwell stress (1/3)µ0MH, the estimated deformation in 1 T is 4%, or 1% in 0.5T.
A similar result is obtained by relating the Maxwell stress to the magnetic Bond number Bm, the dimensionless ratio of magnetic to surface energy, defined as Bm = χB2d/2µ0γ. This ratio is 0.2 for a 4 mm droplet of water in 1 T and one or two orders of magnitude greater in solutions of paramagnetic ions. The deformation of the droplet in a uniform applied field is proportional to the square of the field, the susceptibility of the liquid and the size of the droplet itself [21, 22].
The field produced by a single permanent magnet is inherently non-uniform in magnitude and direction. To achieve an approximately-uniform field over a droplet, the magnets must have dimensions that are several times that of the drop. A simple configuration uses two identical rectangular magnet blocks magnetized the same direction, with the drop in the airgap between them. The permanent magnet configurations in Fig. 8.2a and b are assemblies of small magnet cubes designed apply a vertical magnetic field gradient ∇B to a pendant droplet.
Magnet arrays that produce a a vertical field with a vertical gradient and b a horizontal field with a vertical gradient. Black arrows show direction of magnetization of the green permanent magnets. The variation of B and ∇zB with height above the centre of each magnet array is shown. The measurement positions in the vertical and horizontal fields are noted
Measurements of the influence of magnetic field on the shape of a pendant drop are conveniently made by first observing the drop in zero field in an optical contact analyser, then raising the permanent magnet array so that the drop is immersed in the field and after several minutes of observation lowering the magnets and observing the drop again in zero field. In this way it is possible to correct for any drift. An example of a measurement of water in the nonuniform field produced by the magnet arrays of Fig. 8.2a and b is shown in Fig. 8.3. All three effects listed above are simultaneously present, but the Kelvin force is dominant, and it tends to partially levitate a drop of pure water since B∇zB at the centre is − 43 T2m−1, a fraction of that given by Eq. 8.5. The points on the figure correspond to fitted images, with the normal value of g, the acceleration due to gravity, and a change in ‘apparent surface tension’ γeff that best fits the shape.
The deformation due to the magnetic field gradient effect is the greatest whenever it is present, but it is eliminated when the field is uniform. The influence of a uniform 450 mT field on γeff of deionized water is an increase of 0.19 ± 0.21 mNm−1. The error is the standard deviation on the mean of 37 measurements. The contribution of Maxwell stress to the deformation of a pure water droplet is negligible.
3 Surface Tension
3.1 Static Surface Tension
Returning to the question of surface tension, it is possible to eliminate any direct influence of magnetic forces on a liquid that has exactly zero susceptibility. This is achieved in dilute solutions of the right concentration of a paramagnetic ion to cancel the diamagnetic susceptibility of water, giving a net zero-susceptibility aqueous solution. Any effect of a magnetic field on surface tension should then reflect its influence on the chemical bonding in the water. The zero-susceptibility molar concentration of paramagnetic ions is calculated by setting to zero the sum of the diamagnetic contribution of water (dimensionless susceptibility, χw = − 9 × 10–6).
and the positive Curie law susceptibility the of 3d or 4f ions
were n is the is the number of ions per unit volume, g is the Landé g-factor and the effective Bohr magneton number peff is (S(S + 1))1/2 for 3d ions and (J(J + 1))1/2 for 4f ions where S and J are the spin quantum number and the total angular momentum quantum number, respectively [13]. The effective ionic moment is peffµB where µB is the Bohr magneton. The numerical expression for the susceptibility of a mole of ions is χmol = 1.571 × 10–6 peff2/T. The susceptibility of an aqueous ionic solution of molarity x in the dilute limit is therefore
where the first term is the susceptibility of a litre of water. Hence, we can calculate the molar concentration x0 of any paramagnetic ion where the net susceptibility of the solution is zero. Table 8.2 lists the molar susceptibility of Cu2+, Mn2+ and Dy3+, the three ions we will consider here, as well as the molarity x0 = − 9 × 10–9/χmol of the zero-susceptibility solution where χmol is the molar susceptibility of the ions, given by Eq. 8.6 with n = N0 and using a Landé g-factor of 2 for 3d ions and 4/3 for Dy3+. Results for the three ions at T = 295 K are shown in Table 8.2. Also included are the experimental values of x0exp measured by SQUID magnetometry, which are a little different.
From measurement of the zero-susceptibility solutions, we deduce that the change is surface tension in a 0.5 T gradient field is − 0.40mNm−1 for 0.47 M Cu, − 0.48mNm−1 for 0.051 M Mn and − 0.30mNm−1 for 0.017 M Dy. Similar results, − 0.11mNm−1 for 0.47 M Cu, − 0.51mNm−1 for 0.051 M Mn and − 0.50mNm−1 for 0.017 M Dy are obtained in a 0.4 T uniform field because the Maxwell stress is then negligible [51]. These are all small changes, barely outside experimental error of zero. A superconducting magnet and a different means of measuring surface tension is needed for a more significant result. Such measurements have been done by Fujimura and Iino who find an increase of just 1.83 mNm−1 in 10 T for pure water [26] or 0.09 mNm−1 in 0.5T.
3.2 Dynamic Surface Tension
Considering the influence of magnetic fields on surface tension in a dynamic context provides an interesting insight into their effects on water. Water has been suggested to have a dynamic surface tension that can be inferred by examining the process of droplet pinch-off, a highly surface tension-driven event [29]. When a drop detaches from an orifice, a thin filament is first formed as the drop pulls away under gravity, which elongates while decreasing in diameter until the filament breaks and the drop detaches. At times close to the filament breaking or pinch-off, the thinning behaviour of an inviscid fluid can be described by a universal scaling law
where Dmin is the minimum filament diameter, A is a universal prefactor and t is the time from detachment (t-t0) [37]. Some evidence has been reported that shows viscous effects still have an effect for low viscosity fluids such as water even for filament diameters much greater than the viscous length scale, lv = µ2/γρ, for dynamic viscosity µ [17]. Pinch-off in this scaling regime is independent of gravity as the filament diameters close to pinch-off are much lower than the capillary length κ−1 = (γ/ρg)1/2 (2.72 mm for water) (Fig. 8.4).
Minimum filament diameter of water as a function of dimensionless time t*, in which the time to pinch-off is normalised by the capillary time tc = (ρD03/γ)½. Data for water in no magnetic field as well as three different gradient fields superpose. Inset: diameters at times close to pinch-off in which the proposed scaling law should apply. No effect of the magnetic field can be observed
Applying a gradient field to a detaching droplet has the effect of modifying the overall body force the fluid filament experiences due to the Kelvin force. This is evident when observing the pinch-off of a fluid such as 0.11M DyCl3 which is more magnetically susceptible than water. Figure 8.5b shows the fluid filament of a 0.11M DyCl3 drop pulled towards a permanent magnet placed to the right of the drop resulting in an angle of tilt of 8°, while a much smaller tilt is observed in water in Fig. 8.5a. The modified body force results in the effective gravity the drop experiences changing by a small amount. However, as the filament diameters close to pinch off are much smaller than the capillary length of 2.72 mm for water, the small change in the effective gravitational force due to the presence of the gradient field does not affect the pinch-off dynamics, even in the case of 0.11M DyCl3 after correcting the image for tilt. Using high speed photography, we have shown this to be case as no measurable effect on the pinching dynamics by a gradient field was observed [51].
4 Evaporation Rate
A possible influence of magnetic field on evaporation rate of water has attracted the attention of experimentalists in recent years, and a body of often-contradictory experimental results has accumulated. Some of the reports of persistent magnetic field enhancement of water evaporation rate [11, 24, 28, 40, 46, 55] been reviewed by Chibowski and Szcses [10]. Here we address the questions of if and why a static or intermittent magnetic field can change the evaporation rate? Whenever possible, control experiments where relevant environmental factors such as airflow, relative humidity and temperature are carefully controlled, or continuously monitored as two samples, one in magnetic field and the other a no-field reference are simultaneously subject to otherwise identical, but possibly time-varying ambient conditions.
Various types of experiments have been carried out: First, are those where the weight of an open vessel of water is measured while it is exposed to a static field B and compared to a no-field reference [2, 4, 11, 40, 55]. These sometimes involve interrupting the experiment at different times to weigh the vessel and the remaining water. A better approach is to monitor an in-field sample and a no-field control simultaneously. An alternative protocol is to measure the loss of weight by evaporation in zero field at different times after a single brief exposure to a static field [32], and compared with an unexposed sample in the same conditions. Here, a persistent memory effect of magnetic field exposure on the water is sought. The field is commonly produced by a permanent magnet, rather than an electromagnet, to avoid any heating but the field is inevitably nonuniform to some extent in magnitude and direction over the evaporating water surface unless the surface area is very much smaller than the airgap of the magnet. Fields used range from tens to hundreds of millitesla.
Second are those types of experiment where the water is exposed to a nonuniform field, by continuous flow at a velocity ≳ 1 cms−1 around a circuit where a permanent magnet surrounds a section of the pipe [2, 23, 58, 60]. The experimental setup resembles that used for magnetic treatment of hard water to control limescale, except that the water is usually circulated not just once but repeatedly through the inhomogeneous magnetic field, which is equivalent to periodically exposing the water to ~ 20 ms magnetic field pulses at frequency of about 1 Hz. After a fixed circulation period with one or many pulses, the magnetically-treated water is removed and its rate of evaporation is tracked by weighing. Remarkably, both types of experiments give qualitatively similar results—a modest increase of evaporation rate is usually reported. They have been combined in a two-stage experiment to increase the effect [62].
There is little consistency in the experimental protocols adopted, and results depend on humidity, temperature, magnetic field and time in different ways. Reported increases in evaporation rate associated with the magnetic field range from a few percent to more than 30% [4, 8, 11, 23, 32, 40, 55]. The magnetic field was thought to modify somehow the network of molecular hydrogen bonding in water, but there is no agreed explanation of how this might occur. It must be a subtle phenomenon—the direct decrease in energy of ½χmolB2/µ0 of water with molar susceptibility χmol = − 1.6 10–10 [13] in a field of 1 T is—64 µJ/mol, seven orders of magnitude less than the energy of a hydrogen bond in water [57].
The third type of experiment less controversial. Here water was exposed to an intense magnetic field of order 10 T in a superconducting solenoid, with a large horizontal gradient ∇xB so that the product B∇xB is 320 T2m−1. The explanation here [46] lies in the paramagnetic susceptibility of atmospheric oxygen, which is displaced by the evaporating water vapor. The magnetic forces are 17% of the buoyancy forces on air, which leads to a field-induced modification of gaseous convection and hence the water evaporation rate.
4.1 Droplets
There are reports in the literature of the evaporation of water in sessile and pendant droplets. Notable are interferometric measurements based on Newtons rings from a sessile droplet by Verma and Singh [59] who reported an increase of evaporation rate of 28% in the presence of a 100 mT magnetic field. This method is rapid and accurate with a precision of 5 nm for the droplet height.
Evaporation rates of water can be modified by dissolved ions that have the propensity to make (kosmotropes) or break (chaotropes) the hydrogen-bonded structure of liquid water and thereby reduce or increase the evaporation rate compared with pure water. This influence is reflected in the Hofmeister series of dissolved cations or anions [53]. The evaporation rate of droplets on hydrophilic surfaces increases with salt content, and Marangoni convection of the solute, which is due to different evaporation rates at the centre and edge of the droplet that leads to a radial thermal and surface-tension gradients, is the dominant cause of advective flows in the solutions [36]. Flow in the liquid entrains a convective flow in the adjacent air that modifies the evaporation rate.
Similar flows in pendant droplets are modified by uniform magnetic fields in the 100 mT range acting on conducting ~ 0.1 M solutions of FeCl3 CoCl2 and NiSO4, with significant enhancement of the evaporation rate [35]. These are essentially magnetohydrodynamic damping effects the Lorentz force
acting on the Marangoni flow in a liquid with conductivity σ, an explanation that does not depend on the magnetism of the dissolved cation. No increase of surface tension was found by Jaiswal et al.
4.2 Confined Water and Aqueous Solutions
Our own work has focussed on simultaneous measurements of twin samples in the same Perspex enclosure to restrict airflow, one exposed to a quasi-uniform 300–500 mT field, the other a no-field control. Temperature and relative humidity are monitored automatically for periods of up to 60 h. Evaporation of water or aqueous solutions was investigated either from open beakers or from tiny drops centred in microchannels. The twin magnetic setups are illustrated in Figs. 8.6 and 8.12.
4.2.1 Open Beakers
Two 100 ml beakers are half-filled with water or aqueous solution and placed on separate balances in the Perspex enclosure. One is surrounded by a large Halbach ring magnet producing a quasi-uniform magnetic field over the liquid surface close to 500 mT, with a field gradient reaching 3 Tmm−1 at the edge. (Fig. 8.6). Evaporation is proportional to the surface area, and the weights of the two beakers are monitored for periods from 1 to 60 h. Some short-time runs were also made using a single beaker on a normal laboratory balance with doors shut to exclude draughts [52] for reasons that will become clear.
Deionized water. Most work, including 36 runs of 16 or 60 h, was done with Millipore deionized water. In every case, evaporation was greater in the presence of the magnetic field. The average enhancement was 12 ± 7% [52] (Fig. 8.6).
Extended 60 h run of evaporation of water versus time for a 50 mL sample of water in 500 mT (red) and the no-field reference (black, grey). a relative weight loss by evaporation b evaporation rates versus time and c histograms of the evaporation rates, where the average values are marked by blue arrows [52]
The evaporation rate averaged over all runs for which RH = 0.73 ± 0.06 is 0.0297 ± 0.0081 kgm−2 h−1 without field and 0.0331 ± 0.0088 kgm−2 h−1 in the 500 mT field with the field gradient. The rate often fluctuated by 10% or more In the course of the experiments because of slow variations of in ambient temperature and relative humidity. An extended, 60 h run is analysed in Fig. 8.7. Fluctuations due to changes of the ambient temperature and humidity, as well as local variations of evaporation rate in the beakers lead to the fluctuations during the run illustrated in Fig. 8.7b, but it should be noted that at almost any instant, the evaporation rate of the sample in the magnetic field is greater than that of the reference. The net weight loss in the magnetic field in this case was 14% greater than that of the reference at the end of the run.
The evaporation rate varies non-linearly with temperature T which determines the capacity ca of dry air to absorb water vapor plotted in Fig. 8.8a; the variation around room temperature is 6% per K. It also varies with relative humidity RH. Although we did not control it, the value was often in the range 60–70%. Sometimes the rate was quite steady over a 16-h period, but on other occasions it changed by 5–20%. Evaporation rates of water from half-filled 100 mL beakers versus (100—RH) with RH in % are plotted in Fig. 8.8b. The data are taken at different times of the year and corrected to 23 ℃. A star marks the average value of g obtained from the 36 extended runs where the average humidity was 72.8%. The data suggest that the evaporation rate is proportional to (100—RH) and they extrapolate to 0.115 (10) kgm−2 h−1 for dry air.
An empirical formula for the evaporation rate of water in open air, used by engineers is [25]
The prefactor Θ is numerically equal to (25 + 17v) kgm−2 h−1, where v is the speed of the surface airflow in ms−1. In still, dry air at 23 °C, the predicted value of g at 50% RH is 0.49 kgm−2 h−1. The water in the beaker evaporates 45 times more slowly, Fig 8.8b, extrapolated to 100%.
6 M urea solution. Next, we consider a different liquid where 26.5 w/w% of the water has been replaced by urea, a non-volatile liquid that has no appreciable vapor pressure and is expected to disrupt the hydrogen bonding when in solution in the host water. Here we find that the evaporation rate is 0.0422(23) kgm−2 h−1 at a relative humidity of 49%, which extrapolates to 0.0867 kgm−2 h−1 in dry air. This is appreciably less than the value for pure water. In urea solution, the magnetic field decreases the rate of evaporation significantly, by 28 ± 6% to 0.330 (41) kgm−2 h−1 [52].
Salt solutions. Results obtained on ionic salt solutions reveal a rich variety of behaviour both as regards dry evaporation rate and the influence of magnetic field. For example, the evaporation rate of water from lithium, sodium and potassium chloride solutions decrease monotonically with increasing molarity, and it is 50% lower in 4 M NaCl compared to pure water (Fig. 8.9). The effect of magnetic field is to increase the evaporation rate for most concentrations around 1 M. The evaporation rate of a sessile droplet of water in open air is 0.91 kgm−2 h−1, and it is not influenced by a magnetic field. However, when the droplet is surrounded by a quartz cuvette partially open at the base so that the droplet evaporates into its own vapor, Fig. 8.10b, the rate is reduced by a factor 20 but errors are large, as seen in Fig. 8.10c.
Time dependence
At this point another experimental result helps to cast light on what is controlling the evaporation of water from beakers. Water is simply poured into a 100 mL beaker, which is placed on a chemical balance with the doors shut to exclude drafts while weight loss is monitored for the first two hours. The beaker again is roughly half full. No magnetic field is applied. The initial transient is quite different from the steady rate reached after about an hour. (This is a reason for using long runs used to measure evaporation rates). Results for deionized water are shown in Fig. 8.11, where data were fitted to the equation
Short-term evaporation of Millipore water in stagnant conditions, showing the steady-state and initial transient regimes, measured in a chemical balance. The initial transient, which decays exponentially with a time constant of 9 min is followed by uniform steady-state evaporation after about 30 min
The mass of water at the start of an experiment is m(0), τ is the decay time of the initial transient, and g0 and g are the initial and steady state evaporation rates in kgs−1.
The average of eight one-hour runs for water gave an initial evaporation rate g0 = 0.134 ± 0.030 kgm−2 h−1 and an average τ of 14 ± 3 min. The long-time evaporation rate was only half as great 0.068 ± 0.010 kgm−2 h−1, Table 8.3.
These key difference between the early and later stages of evaporation is that initially water is evaporating into ambient air whereas later it is evaporating into air in the beaker where most the water vapor originally in ambient air has been replaced by vapor from the evaporating liquid. How they differ is discussed in §6. When deionized water is replaced by heavy water, the evaporation rate is less than half as great (0.013 kgm−2h−1) and no initial transient is observed (Table 8.3).
From the typical evaporation rates, which depend on both temperature and relative humidity, and a density of air of 1.2 kgm3, the time taken to evaporate enough fresh water vapor to create a relative humidity of 50% in the empty half of the beaker of order 20 min. The average time taken for a water molecule escaping from the surface with a root mean square velocity deduced from equipartition of energy of 630 ms−1 to diffuse out of the beaker is of order a minute or two. The evaporation at the surface is controlled by a mass balance of freshly escaping water vapor and recondensing molecules from region a within a few mean free paths of the surface, where the freshly evaporated molecules become the majority after a time τ.
When evaporation is measured from aqueous solutions as a function of time it is important to establish thermal equilibrium at ambient temperature before beginning measurements in the balance. Some salts like LiCl are exothermic when mixed with water, but urea is endothermic. In these cases any initial transient may be masked by the effects of temperature changes on the evaporation rate.
4.2.2 Water in Microfluidic Channels
Following from the idea that confinement of the fresh water vapor may be necessary to observe a magnetic field effect on the evaporation rate, we have performed experiments in microchannels analogous to those described in Sect. 8.4.2.1 [50]. The channels are made from three layers of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) assembled by thermo-lamination after cutting a 1 mm wide channel, 54 mm long in the 0.38 mm thick middle layer with a CO2 laser. The experimental arrangement is illustrated in Fig. 8.12. No magnetic field is applied to water in one channel while water in the other is exposed to a 300 mT field perpendicular to the channel, produced by rectangular 50 × 20 × 10 mm3 Nd-Fe-B magnets. Evaporation is monitored by simultaneously imaging 0.4 µL droplets of Millipore water positioned at the centres of the two 50 mm channels with PCE800mm USB cameras The ends of each microchannel are open to ambient air, and the evolution of the shapes of the drops are recorded as they shrink down to a membrane after several hours and rupture shortly afterwards. The twin setup was enclosed in a perspex box and the ambient temperature (26 ℃) and relative humidity RH (42%) in the laboratory were controlled throughout.
Menisci appear at the edges of the drops with contact angles θ of about 30°, as seen in Fig. 8.12. Water normally exhibits a contact angle < 90° on PMMA [63], but the menisci form because of the periodic variation of the channel width due to cutting with the CO2 laser. The variation is 10% of the 1 mm channel width with a period of 300 µm. Just like a magnetic domain wall, the water seeks to minimize its surface area and form a circular meniscus because of surface tension. As the water evaporates, the meniscus jumps to a neighbouring pinning point in a stick–slip process. The volume of water in the confined drop is deduced from its approximately symmetric shape parameterized by L, the average of the contact lengths at the two edges and l, the distance between the centers of the two menisci, as shown in Fig. 8.12b. The volume V of liquid, calculated from L and l knowing the width w and the depth d of the channel, is
where contact angle θ is tan−1 [(2R-L + l)/w] [50].
Some results are illustrated in Fig. 8.13; Figure 8.13a captures the last moments of a sample of water that shrinks to a membrane, and then ruptures, while Fig. 8.13b shows a typical sample that takes almost four hours to evaporate. Sessile droplets of recondensed water vapor can be seen growing in the channel beyond the menisci, which indicate that the air in the channel is saturated with water vapor. The areas of the menisci from which evaporation is occurring remains roughly constant and equal to 2wd.
a Evolution of 0.12 μL drop of water in a microfluidic channel. After 39 min it has shrunk to membrane that ruptures 30 s later. b A typical example of evaporation of a 0.5 μL drop. Sessile droplets of recondensed water vapor grow in the channel beyond the menisci, indicating that relative humidity there is 100% [50]
Data for two representative runs are shown in Fig. 8.14. Initial values of L and l are normalized to 1. The runs, like those in the beakers, showed significant variability. The average evaporation rate from the control channel over ten runs was 0.13 ± 0.03 kgm−2 h−1, which is four times that in the beakers. The magnetic field enhancement was much greater, ranging up to 140%, with an average of 61 ± 42%. The stable sessile droplets of water with diameters of 30–150 µm growing slowly in the channel throughout a run were observed in most of the measurements when a magnetic field was applied. They appear at distances greater than about 100 µm from the menisci in Fig. 8.2b, which means that the air in the microchannel at 299 K is be saturated with water vapor, and they may be a result of the enhanced evaporation rates shown in Fig. 8.14.
The flow dynamics of water in the microchannel and in the beaker must be quite different. The flow regime in the two cases may be characterized by the inverse Bond number, the dimensionless ratio − (∂γ/∂T)/βρgd2 of Marangoni to Rayleigh numbers, which reflects the relative importance of the surface tension and gravitational forces that influence the flow. Here, β = 2.1 × 10–4 K−1 is the thermal expansion coefficient of water and d is the depth. The ratio is 316,000 for the microchannels and 90 for the beakers. Surface tension dominates flow in the channel. The faster evaporation rate of water in the microchannel compared with the beaker is attributed to Marangoni convection. Thermocapillary flow with the vortex pattern sketched in Fig. 8.12b, like that observed at a meniscus in a capillary [6, 7, 20], will increase evaporation in the microchannel. Magnetic field is known to influence the flow in droplets of ferrofluids and conducting fluids [19, 35] (Eq. 8.9), but the deionized water we use is neither conducting nor magnetic. We need a different explanation.
The vapor close to the meniscus is composed of freshly evaporated molecules, which need high kinetic energy and well-timed making and breaking of at least three hydrogen bonds at the interface in to break loose [45]. The isomer ratio of such water vapor may differ from that in liquid water and its effective temperature will be higher than ambient in the channel, allowing it to evaporate without immediately recondensing. The Knudsen layer where there is a temperature gradient normal to the water surface [34] should be wide enough to allow evaporation to proceed into the channel at the ambient temperature of 26 ℃.
5 An Explanation
5.1 Isomers of Water
We saw in the discussion of Fig. 8.11 that water vapor freshly evaporated at a liquid surface seems to be different from that in equilibrium in the atmosphere. Not all molecules of H2O are the same. Water exists as one of two nuclear isomers, according to whether the two proton spins are aligned parallel with net nuclear spin I = 1, or antiparallel with net nuclear spin I = 0, as shown in Fig. 8.15. Molecules with a nuclear spin triplet or singlet are known (somewhat confusingly) as ortho or para water respectively and every molecule is in one state or the other. To conserve angular momentum, the ortho isomer has an angular momentum of \(\hbar\) in its ground state and the para isomer, which has none, is lower in energy by 2.95 meV (34.3 K). There are three possible spin substates with I = 1, namely Iz = 1, 0 and -1, but only one, Iz = 0, with I = 0. The spin substates are respectively symmetric |↑↑〉, |↑↓〉 + |↓↑〉, |↓↓〉 and antisymmetric |↑↓〉 − |↓↑〉. The water vapor in equilibrium at ambient temperature is expected to exhibit an ortho:para ratio of 3:1, and this has been confirmed by terahertz spectroscopy of the vibrational energy levels [44] in the 0–3 THz range. However, the ratio in liquid water, which will be influenced by hydrogen bonding, is thought to be close to 1:1 [47], and the ratio in the escaping water vapor, which has to be involved in a three-body collision in order to break free [45] will be different again.
Unlike the corresponding isomers of hydrogen gas, H2, which differ in energy by 15 meV in their ground states and can be separated in the gas phase just above the boiling point and then used for dynamic nuclear polarization to enhance the sensitivity of nmr, it has proved very difficult to separate ortho and para water by physical methods. Separation rates of 1 pL per day have been achieved in molecular beams, but the separated liquid isomers have half-lives of about an hour at ambient temperature [33] and 3:1 equilibrium is soon re-established. However, the molecular isomers in the vapor phase are much longer-lived and equilibrium can take weeks to establish [9].
Nuclear singlet–triplet transitions are strongly forbidden [1], so ortho and para water vapor may be regarded as separate molecular species—two quasi-independent gasses. This hypothesis allows us to rationalize the observed magnitudes of the evaporation rates with and without a magnetic field in terms of the ortho:para ratio fvo:fvp of the escaping water vapor.
5.2 Analysis
Data analysis is based on the hypothesis that ortho and para water vapor behave as independent gasses on the timescale of the experiments. The ratio in freshly-evaporated liquid fL is evaluated from the data, assuming the re-condensation rate is constant and isomer-independent, and the effect of the magnetic field is to modify the isomeric ratio in the vapor. The main difference between the beaker, microchannel or confined sessile droplet and water in open air is that the water will be evaporating into its own vapor in a steady state, with an isomer ratio foL:fpL whereas in open air water is evaporating into ambient water vapor with an isomer ratio foV: fpV of 3:1. Water evaporating in a sheltered space the originally filled with ambient air, will gradually replace the ambient air by air with a the isomer ratio foL:fpL of freshly evaporated water. If the space is not sheltered but open to air currents, the ratio will remain 3:1, and magnetic field has no influence on the evaporation rate. This is the case, for example, for unshielded sessile droplets.
The hypothesis is expressed as the ansatz that the evaporation rate is proportional to the dimensionless quantity
The plot of g0 as a function of foL = (1 − fpL) in Fig. 8.16 illustrates the evaporation rate for three different conditions of the surrounding vapor. The grey line foV = 0.75 represents the 3:1 equilibrium ratio in open air. The green parabola represents the situation where the water is evaporating into its own vapor in a confined space. The horizontal red line is for the case where the ratio is 1:1. The horizontal dashed line represents the recombination rate c, which is supposed to be a constant independent of foL; the net evaporation is measured as the height of the grey, red or green line above the dash line. The net value of g0 is multiplied by a factor Θexp to give the actual mass evaporation rate in kgm−2 h−1.
Evaporation diagram based on Eq. 8.15. See text for explanation
The effect of water vapor escaping from a from a liquid and accumulating in half-filled beaker is often to reduce the initial rate from the gray line to that given by the green parabola as time goes on. This means that foL for water lies in zone A1 or A2. There is no effect for foL = 0.5 or 0.75. When the initial rate increases with time, as it does for 6 M urea or 1 M NaCl, foL lies in Zone B. The values of foL and c can be determined more precisely from the no-field to in-field evaporation ratio, which is < 1 in almost all cases.
Magnetic field can alter the isomer ratio in the vapor, and hence the evaporation rate, in two ways [52]. One is via Larmor precession at 43 MHz/T, which tends to de-phase the two protons when a field gradient is present, making foV = fpV (red line), The other is via Lorentz stress on the electric charge dipole, which tends to increase angular momentum of the H2O. In Zone A1 the field effect is always positive. In Zone B it may be negative.
Applying these ideas to pure water we find foL = 39 ± 1% [52]. In the 2 M and 4 M Li and K solutions the value increases to 0.46 for Li and 0.44 for K, assuming c remains 0.4. Na is different, 2 M is similar to water and for 4 M the ortho ratio has increased to 0.46, but for 6 M urea has shifted into Zone B, with a negative field effect and foL ≈ 0.6.
6 Crystallization from Solution
Finally, we summarize some information on a related topic—how the crystallization of ionic crystals from supersaturated aqueous solution can be influenced by a static magnetic field, either to promote single-crystal growth or to selectively inhibit the growth of an unwanted crystal polymorph in favour of another. Explanations of both effects involve proton dimers formed during crystal growth.
6.1 Ionic Crystals
The effect of a magnetic field on the crystallization of a selection of carbonates phosphates, sulphates and oxalates of calcium, magnesium or zinc, as well as the divalent magnetic ions Mn, Fe or Co were studied by Lundager Madsen [41,42,43]. He found that when these sparingly-soluble salts are crystallized from solution in a magnetic field of 270 mT, the rates of nucleation and crystal growth are enhanced in the diamagnetic salts of weak acids but there is no effect at high pH, or when the cations are magnetic. A key observation was that the field had no effect when heavy water is used as the solvent. In D2O, hydrogen is replaced by deuterium, where the nucleus is composed of a proton and a neutron. Both have spin ½ and they couple to give I = 0 making the hydrogen a boson rather than a fermion. The growth of nuclei in solution is assumed to involve the creation of doubly protonated anions on the growing surface, which is possible with no energy penalty for D2 or H2 in an I = 0 singlet para state, but the triply degenerate I = 1 ortho state has a ground state with orbital angular momentum and corresponding vibrational energy that reduces the rate of the process. Nuclear spin relaxation for H2 tends to equalize the ortho and para populations and thereby increase the growth rate [43]. There is no such effect for D2.
6.2 Magnetic Water Treatment
Treatment of hard water to avoid precipitation of hard limescale on heated surfaces in domestic and commercial water heaters, boilers and heat exchangers has a long history of mixed practical success and widespread scientific scepticism [3]. The basic claim that is amenable to investigation is that by passing hard water once through a nonuniform magnetic field, typically generated by an array of permanent magnets, it is possible to influence the subsequent precipitation of calcium carbonate when the water is heated. Aragonite tends to precipitate rather than calcite, and the carbonate then has an acicular morphology that does not form hard scale [15, 30, 31, 38, 39]. The water somehow retains a memory of its magnetic exposure that persists for days. The dilemma of reconciling these observations with the rapidly-changing molecular structure of liquid water was lifted after it was discovered that the calcium carbonate dissolved in water was not entirely in the form of separate Ca2+ cations and HCO3 anions, but partly in the form of amorphous polymeric nanoscale prenucleation clusters [27, 49], subsequently named DOLLOPS (Dynamically Ordered Liquid-Like Oxyanion Polymers) [18]. This has led to a new theory of nucleation [27] and also an idea of how magnetic water treatment may work [14]. The requirement is a durable modification of the pre-nucleation clusters during the fleeting exposure of water to the magnetic field. This could be provided by the magnetic field gradient acting on a layer of bicarbonate anions at the surface of the DOLLOP. Adding a Ca2+ ion to grow the cluster displaces a proton to form a hydrogen dimer in H2CO3 or its stable product H2O + CO2. Dimerization of the protons is a way to achieve a long-lived modification of the cluster by scrambling the proton singlet and triplet states as their spins are dephased in the magnetic field gradient, where their Larmor precession frequencies (42.6 MHzT−1) are slightly different. The field gradient produced by the magnet arrays is comparable to that needed to dephase the protons by π in the time they take to pass through the inhomogeneous magnetic field [14].
7 Conclusions
Magnetic fields have little direct effect on liquid water. Because of its weak diamagnetic susceptibility, exceptionally large magnetic fields and magnetic field gradients are required to produce effects such a magnetic levitation. Compensated solutions of paramagnetic ions with zero susceptibility can be used to avoid extraneous effects of the Kelvin force density on properties such as surface tension. Changes in surface tension measured in pendant droplets are of order − 1% per tesla.
Much larger magnetic effects on the evaporation rate of pure water or aqueous solutions are found when the water is evaporating into its own vapor in a confined space sheltered, from external airflow. Increases of 10–100% are observed for deionized water, depending on confinement, but for aqueous solutions the evaporation rate may increase (many salt solutions) or decrease (6 M urea, 1 M NaCl) in the magnetic field. The sign of the field effect on evaporation appears to be associated with the sign of an initial transient in the evaporation rate observed in no field.
The remarkable magnetic field effects on the evaporation rate have been discussed in terms of a two-vapor model, where the two nuclear isomers of water behave as independent gasses. The ortho:para, triplet to singlet ratio is 3:1 in equilibrium in ambient air, but in freshly-evaporated water vapor it may be quite different. From the magnitude and sign of the magnetic field enhancement and the shape of the zero-field transient evaporation, it is possible to fix both the isomeric ratio of fresh vapor and the recombination rate to within a few percent. The ratio is 39:61 in Millipore water. The effect of a magnetic field is to modify this ratio in the vapor and thereby modify the rate of evaporation from the liquid surface. Two mechanisms are proposed, one is Larmour precession of the two protons on a single water molecule. A magnetic field gradient will dephase their precession and tend to equalize the two populations. Lorentz torque could augment the angular momentum.
Magnetic field effects on crystal growth from saturated aqueous solutions and magnetic water treatment are similarly related to the nuclear spin of proton dimers. We have not observed magnetic memory effects in pure water.
Surprisingly, the average evaporation rate of water in a microfluidic channel where the relative humidity exceeds 100% is notably greater than it is in an open beaker where the vapor is unsaturated. This is likely due thermocapillary flow in the channel. Future work should aim to visualize thermocapilliary flow in microchannels by particle image velocimetry in a field; evidence of a Lorentz force would reveal any related charge flow. The proposed isomer ratios in fresh water vapor should be verified by terahertz spectroscopy.
Our results suggest that the conventional treatment of evaporating water vapor as a single gas needs to be reconsidered in confined spaces where advection is limited. There is a prospect of relating the ortho-para ratio of fresh vapor to hydrogen bonding in different aqueous solutions [53], thereby obtaining new insight into the role of kosmotropic and chaotropic ions in the Hofmeister series. Furthermore, magnetic field may prove to be useful for applications where it is desirable to increase the evaporation rate of water in microscale porous media without raising the temperature [61].
References
A. Abragam: The Principles of Nuclear Magnetism. Clarendon Press (1961)
H.B. Amor et al., Effect of magnetic treatment on surface tension and water evaporation. Int. J. Adv. Ind. Eng. 5(3), 119–124 (2013)
J.S. Baker, S.J. Judd, Magnetic amelioration of scale formation. Water Res. 30(2), 247–260 (1996)
H. Ben Amor et al., Experimental study and data analysis of the effects of ions in water on evaporation under static magnetic conditions. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 47(5), 5547–5553 (2022)
E. Bormashenko, Moses effect: Physics and applications. Adv. Coll. Interface. Sci. 269, 1–6 (2019)
C. Buffone et al., Marangoni convection in evaporating meniscus with changing contact angle. Exp. Fluids 55(10), 1833 (2014)
C. Buffone, K. Sefiane, J.R.E. Christy, Experimental investigation of self-induced thermocapillary convection for an evaporating meniscus in capillary tubes using micro–particle image velocimetry. Phys. Fluids 17(5), 052104 (2005)
M.V. Carbonell, E. Martinez, J.E. Díaz, Evaporation of magnetically treated water and NaCl solutions. Int. Agrophys. 16(3), 171–175 (2002)
M. Chaplin, Ortho-Water and Para-Water (2021). Available from: https://water.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ortho_para_water.html
E. Chibowski, A. Szcześ, Magnetic water treatment–A review of the latest approaches. Chemosphere 203, 54–67 (2018)
E. Chibowski, A. Szcześ, L. Hołysz, Influence of magnetic field on evaporation rate and surface tension of water. Colloids Interfaces 2(4), 68 (2018)
R. Cini, M. Torrini, Temperature dependence of the magnetic susceptibility of water. J. Chem. Phys. 49(6), 2826–2830 (1968)
J.M.D. Coey: Magnetism and Magnetic Materials. Cambridge University Press (2010)
J.M.D. Coey, Magnetic water treatment-how might it work? Phil. Mag. 92(31), 3857–3865 (2012)
J.M.D. Coey, S. Cass, Magnetic water treatment. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 209(1–3), 71–74 (2000)
V.V. Datsyuk, O.R. Pavlyniuk, Maxwell stress on a small dielectric sphere in a dielectric. Phys. Rev. A 91(2), 023826 (2015)
A. Deblais et al., Viscous effects on inertial drop formation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(25), 254501 (2018)
R. Demichelis et al., Stable prenucleation mineral clusters are liquid-like ionic polymers. Nat. Commun. 2(1), 1–8 (2011)
P. Dhar, Thermofluidic transport in droplets under electromagnetic stimulus: A comprehensive review. J. Indian Inst. Sci. 99(1), 105–119 (2019)
H.K. Dhavaleswarapu et al., Experimental investigation of steady buoyant-thermocapillary convection near an evaporating meniscus. Phys. Fluids 19(8), 082103 (2007)
J. Dodoo, A. Stokes, Field-induced shaping of sessile paramagnetic drops. Phys. Fluids 32, 061703 (2020)
J. Dodoo, A.A. Stokes, Shaping and transporting diamagnetic sessile drops. Biomicrofluidics 13(6), 064110 (2019)
J.A. Dueñas et al., Magnetic influence on water evaporation rate: An empirical triadic model. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 539(July), 168377 (2021)
J.A. Dueñas et al., Effect of low intensity static magnetic field on purified water in stationary condition: Ultraviolet absorbance and contact angle experimental studies. J. Appl. Phys. 127(13), 133907 (2020)
Engineering ToolBox, Evaporation from a Water Surface (2004). Available from: https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/evaporation-water-surface-d_690.html
Y. Fujimura, M. Iino, The surface tension of water under high magnetic fields. J. Appl. Phys. 103(12), 124903 (2008)
D. Gebauer, A. Völkel, H. Cölfen, Stable prenucleation calcium carbonate clusters. Science 322(5909), 1819–1822 (2008)
Y.Z. Guo et al., Evaporation rate of water as a function of a magnetic field and field gradient. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 13(12), 16916–16928 (2012)
I.M. Hauner et al., The dynamic surface tension of water. J. Phys. Chem. 8(7), 1599–1603 (2017)
K. Higashitani et al., Effects of a magnetic field on the formation of CaCO3 particles. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 156(1), 90–95 (1993)
L. Hołysz, E. Chibowski, A. Szcześ, Influence of impurity ions and magnetic field on the properties of freshly precipitated calcium carbonate. Water Res. 37(14), 3351–3360 (2003)
L. Holysz, A. Szczes, E. Chibowski, Effects of a static magnetic field on water and electrolyte solutions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 316(14), 996–1002 (2007)
D.A. Horke et al., Separating para and ortho water. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 53(44), 11965–11968 (2014)
P. Jafari, A. Amritkar, H. Ghasemi, Temperature discontinuity at an evaporating water interface. J. Phys. Chem. C 124(2), 1554–1559 (2020)
V. Jaiswal et al., Magnetohydrodynamics- and magnetosolutal-transport-mediated evaporation dynamics in paramagnetic pendant droplets under field stimulus. Phys. Rev. E 98(1), 13109 (2018)
A. Kaushal et al., Soluto-thermo-hydrodynamics influenced evaporation kinetics of saline sessile droplets. Eur. J. Mech. B. Fluids 83, 130–140 (2020)
J.B. Keller, M.J. Miksis, Surface tension driven flows. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 43(2), 268–277 (1983)
S. Knez, C. Pohar, The magnetic field influence on the polymorph composition of CaCO3 precipitated from carbonized aqueous solutions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 281(2), 377–388 (2005)
S. Kobe et al., Control over nanocrystalization in turbulent flow in the presence of magnetic fields. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 23(6–8), 811–815 (2003)
F. Lafta Rashid et al., Increasing water evaporation rate by magnetic field. Int. Sci. Investig. J. 2(3), 61–68 (2013)
H.E.L. Madsen, Influence of magnetic field on the precipitation of some inorganic salts. J. Cryst. Growth 152(1–2), 94–100 (1995)
H.E.L. Madsen, Crystallization of calcium carbonate in magnetic field in ordinary and heavy water. J. Cryst. Growth 267(1–2), 251–255 (2004)
H.E.L. Madsen, Theory of electrolyte crystallization in magnetic field. J. Cryst. Growth 305(1), 271–277 (2007)
A.A. Mamrashev et al., Detection of nuclear spin isomers of water molecules by Terahertz time-domain spectroscopy. IEEE Trans. Terahertz Sci. Technol. 8(1), 13–18 (2018)
Y. Nagata, K. Usui, M. Bonn, Molecular mechanism of water evaporation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115(23), 1–5 (2015)
J. Nakagawa et al., Magnetic field enhancement of water vaporization. J. Appl. Phys. 86(5), 2923–2925 (1999)
S.M. Pershin, A.F. Bunkin, Temperature evolution of the relative concentration of the H2O ortho/para spin isomers in water studied by four-photon laser spectroscopy. Laser Phys. 19(7), 1410–1414 (2009)
J.S. Philo, W.M. Fairbank, Temperature dependence of the diamagnetism of water. J. Chem. Phys. 72(8), 4429–4433 (1980)
E.M. Pouget et al., The initial stages of template-controlled CaCO3 formation revealed by cryo-TEM. Science 323(5920), 1455–1458 (2009)
S. Poulose et al., Magnetic field enhances evaporation of water in confined spaces. IEEE Magn. Lett. 2023(11), 1–5 (2020)
S. Poulose et al., Deformation and necking of liquid droplets in a magnetic field. Phys. Fluids 34(11), 112116 (2022)
S. Poulose et al., Evaporation of water and urea solution in a magnetic field; the role of nuclear isomers. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 629, 814–824 (2023)
B. Rana, D.J. Fairhurst, K.C. Jena, Investigation of water evaporation process at air/water interface using Hofmeister ions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 144(39), 17832–17840 (2022)
R.E. Rosensweig: Ferrohydrodynamics. Dover Books (2013)
A. Seyfi, R. Afzalzadeh, A. Hajnorouzi, Increase in water evaporation rate with increase in static magnetic field perpendicular to water-air interface. Chem. Eng. Process. 120(January), 195–200 (2017)
M.D. Simon, A.K. Geim, Diamagnetic levitation: Flying frogs and floating magnets (invited). J. Appl. Phys. 87(9), 6200–6204 (2000)
S.J. Suresh, V.M. Naik, Hydrogen bond thermodynamic properties of water from dielectric constant data. J. Chem. Phys. 113(21), 9727–9732 (2000)
A. Szcześ et al., Effects of static magnetic field on water at kinetic condition. Chem. Eng. Process. 50(1), 124–127 (2011)
G. Verma, K.P. Singh, Time-resolved interference unveils nanoscale surface dynamics in evaporating sessile droplet. Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 1–4 (2014)
Y. Wang, H. Wei, Z. Li, Effect of magnetic field on the physical properties of water. Results Phys. 8, 262–267 (2018)
K. Yang, G. Ye, G. de Schutter: Will ortho-enriched water increase the durability of concrete. In: Proceeding of 4th International RILEM Conference on Microstructure-Related Durability of Cementitious Composites, pp. 713–720 (2020)
Q.W. Yang, H. Wei, Z. Li, Enhancing water evaporation by combining dynamic and static treatment of magnetic field. Desalin. Water Treat. 216, 299–305 (2021)
C. Zhang et al., Hydrophobic treatment on polymethylmethacrylate surface by nanosecond-pulse DBDs in CF4 at atmospheric pressure. Appl. Surf. Sci. 311, 468–477 (2014)
Acknowledgements
The work was supported by the European Commission from Contract No 766007 for the ‘Magnetism and Microfluidics’ Marie Curie International Training Network. JMDC acknowledges support from Science Foundation Ireland, contract 12/RC/2278_P2 AMBER. JQ acknowledges support from Science Foundation Ireland, contracts 16/RI/3403 and 17/CDA/4704. We are grateful to Luke Coburn-Moran for some of the data in Fig. 8.4 and to Anup Kumar for measurements on heavy water.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Poulose, S., Quirke, J.A., Coey, M. (2024). Influence of Magnetic Field on Water and Aqueous Solutions. In: Doudin, B., Coey, M., Cēbers, A. (eds) Magnetic Microhydrodynamics. Topics in Applied Physics, vol 120. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-58376-6_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-58376-6_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-58375-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-58376-6
eBook Packages: Physics and AstronomyPhysics and Astronomy (R0)