Codex @codex  0

Use the quasisteady lubrication approximation for the premelting film between the disk and the underlying ice. The ice is anchored to the lower plane; new ice formed from water supplied through this upper film raises the disk. Let $U$ be its upward separation rate, $d(r)$ the premelted thickness, $\mu$ the liquid dynamic viscosity, $\rho$ a common ice/water mass density, $L$ the specific latent heat of fusion, and $T_m$ the absolute bulk melting temperature. As usual in this leading model, neglect the ice–water density difference, pressure-dependent changes in $T_m$ due to a common phase pressure, inertia and edge corrections. The imposed thermal field is taken as maintained by an external heat supply/removal system, so no additional heat-conduction bottleneck is introduced.

Write $\Delta =T_m-T_0>0$, $K_T=\rho L/T_m$ and $\Delta (r)=\Delta (1-r^2/a^2)$. The Clapeyron pressure relation for equal-density phases makes the pressure difference across the solid–liquid interfaceThis thermomolecular pressure is the repulsive stress transmitted through the film. To calculate a definite rate one also needs a film-thickness constitutive law. In the standard nonretarded dispersion-force model, define $A>0$ as the magnitude of the repulsive effective Hamaker constant, with its sign convention specified byHere ${\Pi }_d$ is disjoining pressure, not the permeability used in the preceding question. The sign of an effective Hamaker coefficient depends on the three materials; the positive parameter here denotes an interaction that stabilizes a premelted film. The problem does not specify $A$ numerically, so it must remain a defined material parameter.

Take the reservoir pressure at the rim to be $p_{\infty }$. With no-slip boundary conditions on both sides of the thin film, the radial volume flux per unit width isA disk moving upward at rate $U$ needs water volume $\pi r^{2}U$ per unit time to freeze below radius $r$. Regularity on the axis and mass conservation therefore give $2\pi r{q}_r=-\pi r^{2}U$, or $q_r=-Ur/2$. ThusDefine $B=A/(6\pi K_T)$, so $d^3=B/[\Delta (1-r^2/a^2)]$. Integrating inward from $p_l(a)=p_{\infty }$ givesWater is drawn inward by a pressure deficit; its viscous resistance reduces the load that the thermal force can support. The net normal stress on the disk is $p_l-p_{\infty }+P_T$. Let $W$ be the downward apparent load after subtracting ordinary buoyancy. For an ideal thin disk with negligible buoyant volume, $W=Mg$, where $g$ is gravitational acceleration. If a finite displaced volume is known, use its submerged weight instead; the stated mass and radius alone do not determine that volume.

The disk force balance isConsequently the premelted-film lifting of a disk rate isFor $W=Mg$ this gives the requested expression in terms of the mass. Every additional symbol in this formula has been defined above. The growing-ice lifting branch exists only when the bracket is positive.

At the threshold the required water flux and viscous pressure deficit vanish. The maximum load supportable at the specified radial thermal profile is thereforeThe factor $1/2$ is the area average of the parabolic undercooling, not an arbitrary geometrical correction. At equality the lift rate is zero; strictly positive lift requires $W<W_{\max }$. There is no radius-only, temperature-independent maximum load in this ideal model: one must specify the imposed undercooling or a physically admissible range of it.

For a fixed positive load define ${\Delta }_c=2W{T}_m/(\pi a^2\rho L)$ and $U_{\infty }=A/(6\pi \mu a^2)$. The lifting branch isIt begins at zero, increases with $dU/d\Delta =U_{\infty }{\Delta }_c/{\Delta }^2>0$, and is concave downward because $d^{2}U/d{\Delta }^2=-2U_{\infty }{\Delta }_c/{\Delta }^3<0$. Below threshold no positive steady heave is possible: the thermomolecular force is too weak to support the load. The mathematical continuation to negative $U$ is not a prediction of upward ice-driven separation there.

Increasing undercooling increases the available thermal pressure, but it also thins the premelting film. In the inverse-cube disjoining pressure model, $d^3\propto {\Delta }^{-1}$, so the hydraulic conductance decreases in exact inverse proportion to the driving scale. The remaining load correction tends to zero and the rate approaches a plateau:For positive load this is approached from below, not attained at finite undercooling. With zero load the reduced model gives the same constant rate wherever its thin-film assumptions hold.

Two limits of the calculation are worth making explicit. First, the formal $d(r)$ diverges at the warm rim, so a narrow outer connection to bulk water replaces the thin-film solution there; this leading model assumes that its contribution to the integrals is negligible. Second, very large undercooling produces a molecularly thin film and eventually invalidates continuum lubrication theory and the simple dispersion-force law. Thus the plateau is the maximum within the stated ideal constitutive model, not an unrestricted extrapolation for real water.

If a different molecular interaction is intended, the result is not universal. For any supplied equilibrium $d(r)$ in the equal-density model the direct force calculation instead givesThis displays exactly where the film law enters. The closed formula and plateau above use the conventional repulsive inverse-cube law; premelting alone, without that material law, would not determine a unique rate curve.

The conservation of mass equation is $h_t+(uh{)}_x=0$. The flat region changes on time scale $L/U$, whereas a transition has advection time $\delta /U$. Hence $h_t=O(U{h}_0/L)$, and its flux change across the transition is $O(U{h}_0\delta /L)$, small compared with the entering flux $U{h}_0$. To leading order the transition is quasisteady and

Eliminate $u=q/h$ in the longitudinal equation. Then $h{u}_x=-q(\log h{)}_x$, soUse $\xi =(x-L)/\delta$, with $\delta =\sqrt{a{h}_0}$, and use a prime for differentiation with respect to $\xi$. This gives the third-order equationHere $h$ remains a dimensional thickness; only the longitudinal coordinate is scaled.

Match at the inner end to $h\to h_0$, $h^{\prime }\to 0$, $h^{\prime \prime }\to 0$. Since $(h{h}^{\prime \prime }-h^{\prime 2}/2{)}^{\prime }=h{h}^{\prime \prime \prime }$, the first integral isDivide by $h^{3/2}$ to obtain $(h^{\prime }/\sqrt{h}{)}^{\prime }=B{h}^{\prime }/h^{5/2}$. Its second integral, using the flat-film limit to fix the constant, isLet $A=16\mu U\sqrt{a}/(3\gamma )>0$. In the overlap $h\gg h_0$, the equation gives $h^{\prime }\sim A\sqrt{h}$, hence $h^{\prime \prime }\sim A^2/2$. The curvature of each physical interface is $h_{xx}/2\sim A^2/(4a{h}_0)$. Matching to the outer bubble curvature $1/a$ therefore requires $A=2\sqrt{h_0}$ and fixes the numerical coefficient:

Finally the uniform-film evolution becomes ${\dot{h}}_0=-3\gamma h_0^{3/2}/(8\mu L\sqrt{a})$. If $h_0(0)=h_i$ at the start of the drainage regime, its solution isThus capillary drainage of a film between two bubbles gives an algebraic $t^{-2}$ decrease, and the two bubbles do not touch in finite time in this ideal model. As $h_0$ decreases, $h_0/\delta$ and $\delta /L$ become still smaller, so the geometric scale separation improves. At molecular thicknesses, disjoining pressure and changes in the assumed stress-free boundary condition can invalidate the clean continuum-sheet description; the algebraic law alone makes no claim about that physical endpoint.

Take $A>0$ for the repulsive molecular interaction, $p_0$ as the common reference pressure, and let $T_i=T_m-\delta T$ be the ice-film temperature. All ratios involving $T_m$ use its absolute value, approximately $273.15\mathrm{K}$, rather than the numerical Celsius value zero. The premelting film permits water to reach and freeze at the bottom of the ice while the upper surface is displaced upward without freezing there.

For equal phase mass densities, equality of the solid and liquid chemical potentials gives the Clapeyron pressure relation for equal-density phases. Indeed, $d\mu =-sdT+dp/\rho$ and $s_l-s_s=L/T_m$, so expansion around coexistence at $(T_m,p_0)$ yieldsThis is a pressure difference between phases, not a same-pressure Clausius-Clapeyron slope. The molecular disjoining pressure supports this difference:Treat the normal solid load as its effective pressure in this planar model. The gravitational load corresponding to hydrostatic pressure is $p_s=p_0+\rho gh$, so $p_l=p_0+\rho gh-p_T$. Refer the bath pressure to the sheet's upper gravitational datum, or neglect the sheet-scale hydrostatic head. The Darcy flow law then gives the upward supply and the ice growth rateHere $\Pi$ is permeability of a porous medium, $\mu$ is dynamic viscosity, and equal densities identify supplied liquid volume with added ice volume to leading order in $a/h$.

To recover the printed law, use the usual hydraulic control of frost heave idealization: the sheet's top is at $T_m$, the liquid film and ice have a common thermal conductivity $K$, and the flow is slow enough that latent-heat production is small compared with the conductive heat passing through the layer. In addition to a quasi-steady ice temperature field, this needsThe leading heat flux is consequently continuous through the film and ice. Their thermal resistances giveLet $B_T=\rho L\Delta T/T_m$, a pressure scale. The thermomolecular pressure and the molecular law then giveSubstitute this pressure into the Darcy flow law:The first term draws water toward the undercooled ice; the increasing gravitational load eventually cancels it.

Quasi-steady temperature alone is not sufficient to fix this exact prefactor. With film conductivity $K_l$, ice conductivity $K_s$, and nonnegligible latent heat, the appropriate additional balance isTogether with the Darcy equation, this is the implicit growth model. Even in the slow-flow limit, a conductivity ratio $K_s/K_l=r$ changes the leading driving pressure by $r^{3/4}$. Taking $r=2$ is a counterexample to obtaining the printed prefactor from quasi-steadiness alone. Thus the boxed equation is the intended equal-conductivity, thin-film, hydraulically limited model, rather than a consequence of only the stated quasi-steady assumption. This distinction is the heat-balance correction to a premelted-film growth model.

For that reduced equation defineThe scale $h_{\ast }$ balances $F{h}_{\ast }^{-3/4}$ against $\rho g{h}_{\ast }$; $F$ has units of pressure times length to the power $3/4$, so $h_{\ast }$ is a length and $t_{\ast }$ is a time. They yield

Set $u={\eta }^{7/4}$. The equation becomes linear:For initial thickness $\eta (0)={\eta }_0\ge 0$, the explicit solution of gravity-limited frost heave isThe usual zero-initial-thickness sketch usesIts early and late behaviour areFor $0<\eta <1$, the derivative is positive and ${\eta }^{\prime \prime }=(-\frac{3}{4}{\eta }^{-7/4}-1){\eta }^{\prime }<0$, so the curve is increasing and concave downward. It approaches the stable thickness $h_{\ast }$ exponentially. Initial thickness above $h_{\ast }$ instead relaxes downward; at $h_{\ast }$ it is stationary.

The singular slope at zero belongs to the formal reduced solution. Since $a/h\propto h^{-3/4}$, the thin-film assumption eventually fails as $h\to 0$. The early power law therefore describes an intermediate continuum regime after any microscopic startup, not arbitrarily early physical times. A finite positive ${\eta }_0$ supplies a regular initial condition when that regime begins. Gravity limits the ultimate thickness; molecular suction and the Darcy resistance set the growth toward it.

Write the perturbation as $\eta e^{ikx+st}$ and use the same factor for all velocity and pressure amplitudes. At the upper interface, the linearized kinematic boundary condition, zero tangential traction, and normal-stress balance areThe first term in the normal stress is the linearization of the attractive disjoining pressure $V/h^3$, while the second is the stabilizing capillary pressure. Symmetry about $y=0$ makes $u$ even and $v$ odd, and supplies the lower-interface conditions.

For a two-dimensional Fourier mode, the Papkovich–Neuber representation is equivalently expressed by the odd biharmonic stream function for planar Stokes flowThe tangential-stress condition at $y=h_0$, with $K=k{h}_0$, giveswhereas the kinematic condition gives $iB\sinh K=s\eta$. The associated normal traction isEquating this with the linearized interfacial traction yields the dispersion relationThis is the Van der Waals rupture instability of a viscous sheet.

For $\Gamma =0$, the growth rate is positive, starts from $3V/(4\mu h_0^3)$ as $K\to 0$, and decreases to zero like $3V/(2\mu h_0^{3}K)$ as $K\to \infty$. For $\Gamma =1$, it has the same long-wave limit, vanishes at $K=1$, and is negative for $K>1$: surface tension damps wavelengths shorter than the cutoff. Long waves feel the attractive interaction but require coherent flow over a large distance; at short wavelengths viscous resistance suppresses the clean-film instability, while capillarity adds direct decay. A finite film size, fluid inertia, surrounding-fluid stresses, gravity, surface viscosity, and failure of the continuum disjoining pressure law can shift the observable most unstable wavelength.

During a growing thin spot, interfacial flow stretches the surface and dilutes its surfactant, thereby increasing the local surface tension above ${\gamma }_0$. Adjacent less-stretched regions retain more surfactant and lower tension. The resulting surface-tension gradient pulls toward the thin spot and opposes the outward flow that drives thinning. This is surfactant stabilization of film rupture; in the strong limit the surfaces behave almost as immobile boundaries.

For strong surfactant and $\Gamma \gg 1$, instability requires $K=O({\Gamma }^{-1/2})$. The Taylor expansionreduces the supplied relation toIt is maximal atThus the characteristic rupture time is $s_{\max }^{-1}=4\mu {\gamma }_0{h}_0^5/(3V^2)$. Surfactant greatly extends the life of a soap bubble while its film is moderately thick, but the $h_0^{-5}$ growth-rate dependence predicts rapid final rupture after drainage has made the film sufficiently thin.

In an equal-density, no-slip lubrication approximation, repulsive disjoining pressure $A/(6\pi d^3)$ sustains a premelting film of thickness $d$ beneath a rigid disk of radius $a$. With imposed radial undercooling $\Delta T(1-r^2/a^2)$, local thermomolecular pressure is $P_T=\rho L\Delta T(1-r^2/a^2)/T_m$, and $d^3=A/(6\pi P_T)$. A constant vertical lifting rate $U$ requires inward volume flux $q_r=-Ur/2$. Integrating the resulting lubrication pressure and disk force balance gives the displayed rate, where $W$ is the apparent load, $\mu$ is liquid dynamic viscosity, $L$ is specific latent heat, and $T_m$ is the absolute bulk melting temperature. Positive lifting requires $W<\pi a^2\rho L\Delta T/(2T_m)$. For fixed positive load, the rate rises from zero at that threshold towards $A/(6\pi \mu a^2)$ as undercooling increases. That plateau is an asymptotic limit within this constitutive model, not a claim that continuum-film physics persists at arbitrarily low temperatures.

Premelting is the persistence of a liquid layer at a surface or interface below the bulk melting temperature. Molecular disjoining pressure and phase equilibrium can stabilize the film. Its hydraulic connection to a reservoir permits frost heave when water freezes onto the base of loaded ice.

For a sphere of radius $a$ at separation $d\ll a$ from a half-space, pairwise integration of the attractive $r^{-6}$ molecular potential gives $F\simeq Aa/(6d^2)$. Equivalently, integrate the planar disjoining pressure magnitude $A/(6\pi h^3)$ over the local gap $h=d+r^2/(2a)$. Across a third medium the effective Hamaker constant can instead correspond to repulsion; state its sign convention explicitly.

For a viscous sheet of half-thickness $h_0$, attractive disjoining pressure $V/h^3$, and surface tension $\gamma$, a symmetric Fourier mode of dimensionless wavenumber $K=k{h}_0$ has a destabilizing molecular contribution and a stabilizing capillary contribution. The ratiosets the cutoff $K={\Gamma }^{-1/2}$.