From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Dec 31 14:41:57 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD50537B401 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:41:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk [81.2.69.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D659B43EC5 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:41:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gBVMfh74003115 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:41:43 GMT (envelope-from matthew@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: (from matthew@localhost) by happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.12.6/8.12.6/Submit) id gBVMfbeP003114 for freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG; Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:41:37 GMT Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 22:41:37 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Water Damage Message-ID: <20021231224137.GA2474@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophi> Mail-Followup-To: Matthew Seaman , freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG References: <20021230110818.A91089-100000@cactus.fi.uba.ar> <3E11070B.5000306@jcdurham.com> <3E11E7A3.5070404@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01, USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_MUTT version=2.43 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Dec 31, 2002 at 12:07:41PM -0800, Gary W. Swearingen wrote: > Chuck Swiger writes: > > > Jim Durham wrote: > > [ ... ] > > > That's an excellent idea because the alcohol will "absorb" the water > > > (I believe the correct term is that water is "misable" in alcohol), so > > > when the alcohol evaporates it takes the water with it. > > But that "so" there seems unjustified. Maybe the last part is true, but > does the fact that two liquids are misable mean that the lighter one > will carry off the heavier one in evaporation? One could as easily > guess that the heavier one keeps the lighter one's evaporation rate down > to the heavier one's -- or anywhere in between. Or they each evaporate > at their own rates, separating at the moment of evaporation. Arrgh. I'm sorry but this is bugging me. The word is "miscible", from the Latin "miscere" to mix. The point of rinsing with isopropanol is simply to disolve and flush away as much of the bulk water as possible. The drips of isopropanol left on the kit will still contain water (As Chuck pointed out, it's difficult (read "expensive") to make completely dry isopropanol and handle it so that it stays dry). Even so, there will be much less water present after rinsing, so that it won't take much time to dry. The isopropanol itself being a lot more volatile than water evaporates fairly quickly. It's not that mixing alcohol with the water makes the water evaporate faster. The rate of evaporation depends on a number of factors --- * the partial pressures of the alcohol and water vapours above the liquids --- these will be completely independent of each other to a good approximation. * the concentration of the different components in the bulk liquid. Adding alcohol reduces the water concentration so this factor would actually tend to lower the rate of evaporation. * the surface area of the liquid vapour interface, which adding alcohol tends to increase, hence speeding up evaporation. Are we sufficiently off topic yet? Happy New Year, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message