Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 63 references

How to make a giant bubble

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The reason some soap solutions make giant bubbles is the fluid's resistance to stretching, not its shear viscosity.

desk verdict Useful experimental study with a genuinely interesting polydispersity effect, but the central 'extensional rheology is most important' claim relies on a thread-rupture proxy that is not independently validated. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.00537 v2 pith:IE3EOVSA submitted 2019-08-01 physics.flu-dyn cond-mat.soft

Stephen Frazier , Xinyi Jiang , Justin C. Burton This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyncond-mat.soft
keywords giantsoapbubblesextensionalrheologypolymersolutionspolyethyleneoxideguargumpolydispersityfilmthicknesslifetime
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Giant bubbles approaching 100 cubic meters are made from ordinary soap, water, and long-chain polymers, but the physics of why some recipes work has been mostly folklore. This paper argues that the decisive property is extensional rheology: how strongly the liquid resists being stretched into a thin film, which the authors measure through the length of the viscoelastic thread pulled behind a falling drop before it breaks. They find that solutions with longer, more slowly rupturing threads are the ones capable of creating large films, while ordinary shear viscosity and surface tension vary too little across recipes to explain the difference. They also report that polydisperse polymer mixtures, including aged PEO, behave like better bubble solutions at lower total concentration than monodisperse polymers, and that film lifetime is governed separately by polymer molecular weight, concentration, and humidity. If right, the practical rule is to tune the solution for maximum extensional thread resistance while keeping polymer concentration low enough that film formation is not hindered.

What carries the argument

The central object is the viscoelastic thread that a falling drop leaves behind; its rupture length, captured at 2000 frames per second, serves as a proxy for the extensional rheology of the solution under rapid stretching. That proxy is meant to mimic the continuous pulling of a soap film from a rope, where the flow away from the rope is mostly extensional. The supporting machinery is infrared absorption at 3 micrometers, whose exponential extinction maps film thickness versus height over time and yields film lifetime and drainage behavior.

What would settle it

In a controlled setup, pull soap films at fixed speed from a thin frame and measure the maximum film area achievable for each polymer solution, then plot it against the thread rupture length from the dripping-drop test. If the two orderings disagree, with short-thread solutions forming large films or long-thread solutions failing, the rupture-length proxy does not capture the extensional rheology that controls film creation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

This paper establishes that the creation of giant soap films is controlled by the extensional rheology of the polymer solution rather than by its shear viscosity, surface tension, or film lifetime. In a falling-drop experiment, solutions with higher molecular weight polymers or polydisperse mixtures produce threads that stretch several centimeters before rupturing, whereas plain soap water ruptures almost immediately; the same hierarchy tracks the concentrations at which giant-bubble recipes work. At the same time, measurements of film thickness by infrared absorption show that the initial film thickness depends mainly on the detergent, while polymers matter later: they lengthen film lifetime at high molecular weight and concentration by slowing drainage and evaporation, with relative humidity above roughly 75 percent sharply extending lifetime. The authors conclude that 'the extensional rheology of these dilute, polymer solutions is the most important factor in creating the films.'

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on treating the length of the liquid thread stretched by a falling drop as a faithful model of how the fluid behaves when a soap film is pulled continuously from a rope; if that transfer fails, the claim that extensional rheology is the most important factor is not directly supported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Bubble-solution recipes should be judged by how far the liquid thread stretches before breaking, not by how thick or viscous the liquid feels.
  • Polydisperse polymer sources, whether guar, aged PEO, or deliberate blends, deliver the needed extensional strength at lower total polymer concentration than monodisperse samples.
  • Film formation and film survival are decoupled: a solution can stretch into a huge film yet pop quickly, while another can last long but never form a large bubble.
  • Adding polymer to increase film lifetime helps only up to a point; high concentrations that give long lifetimes can inhibit the initial creation of the film.
  • Humidity strongly controls lifetime, so the same solution that fails on a dry day can make long-lived films when relative humidity exceeds roughly 75 percent.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Inference: Because thread rupture length is cheap to measure, it could serve as a practical screening test for giant-bubble recipes, but this is a use the paper does not itself propose.
  • Inference: The cooperative polydispersity effect likely generalizes to other processes where dilute polymer solutions are stretched into filaments, such as spray coating or fiber spinning; the paper's mechanism, clustering of long chains aided by shorter-chain depletants, would predict that deliberate bidisperse blends outperform either single molecular weight.
  • Inference: A direct test separating bulk extensional rheology from surface effects would be interfacial rheometry on PEO-laden soap films; the paper suspects surface viscoelasticity is minor but does not measure it, so that measurement could either confirm or overturn the bulk-rheology interpretation.
  • Inference: If the clustering mechanism is correct, a systematic bidisperse matrix varying long-chain and short-chain concentrations independently should show a peak in extensional resistance at a specific mixing ratio, a prediction that can be checked with the same dripping-drop apparatus.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper investigates the physics of making giant soap bubbles with polymer additives such as guar gum and polyethylene oxide (PEO). The authors characterize the shear rheology of model solutions, use high-speed imaging of dripping drops to measure viscoelastic thread rupture length as an empirical proxy for extensional rheology, and use infrared absorption to measure thickness profiles and lifetimes of vertical soap films. They report that (i) extensional rheology is the most important factor in creating giant-bubble films, (ii) polydisperse or aged PEO mixtures produce longer threads at lower total concentration than monodisperse samples, and (iii) polymer additives increase film lifetime mainly at high concentrations, while initial film thickness is controlled by the detergent. The paper concludes that an optimal recipe combines robust extensional response with long film lifetimes.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper offers a useful practical rule for formulating giant-bubble solutions and identifies a surprising cooperative effect of polydisperse polymer mixtures that warrants further study. Strengths of the study include the use of multiple independent observables (shear viscosity, thread rupture length, film thickness, film lifetime), the external anchoring of concentrations against the commonly cited overlap concentration c* from literature values, and the absence of fitted free parameters in the main comparisons. The data are internally consistent and the paper is clearly written. However, the headline claim about extensional rheology rests on an unvalidated proxy, and the polydispersity claim is explicitly labeled a hypothesis in parts of the text while being stated more strongly in the abstract. These gaps are correctable and should be addressed before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III, Figs. 2-3] The central inference that 'the extensional rheology of these dilute, polymer solutions is the most important factor in creating the films' (Section V) rests entirely on the thread rupture length measured in a dripping drop. The authors state that this quantity is 'more analogous to the continuous pulling of a soap film,' but no evidence is provided that the ranking of solutions by dripping-thread rupture length transfers to the film-pulling geometry. In pinch-off, the extension rate is set by the capillary-viscous timescale and varies in time, whereas a giant-bubble film is pulled from a reservoir at U ~ 1 m/s with kinematics controlled by the film thickness gradient and wand speed; the rupture length also depends on bead formation and initial drop conditions. Since no independent extensional rheometry (e.g., CaBER or FiSER) or a controlled film-pulling experiment is included, the manuscript currently does not directly establish that extensional rheology is the dominant factor. A direct validation of the proxy, or a more cautious claim, is needed.
  2. [Section III, Fig. 4 and Section V] The claim that polydispersity 'leads to better performance at lower concentrations' is inferred from longer thread rupture lengths for aged 2M PEO and a 50/50 2M/4M mixture. No film-formation or film-stability measurement confirms that these polydisperse solutions actually improve performance in the bubble geometry; in fact, Figure 7A shows that the polydisperse J-Lube solutions have shorter film lifetimes than guar at the concentrations typically used for giant bubbles. The authors themselves describe the cooperative mechanism as a hypothesis ('we hypothesize that some degree of clustering...') and call for dedicated extensional rheology experiments. The abstract and conclusion currently overstate the strength of this finding; the paper should either present the polydispersity benefit as a hypothesis or support it with direct bubble-forming measurements.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Figure 5 caption] The second subplot label should be (C), not (B); the caption currently lists two (B) entries.
  2. [Section IV, near Fig. 6] The reference to 'Fig. 6D' is incorrect; Figure 6 has only panels A-C.
  3. [Section V] 'hydrophillic' should be 'hydrophilic'.
  4. [Reference [13]] Reference [13] is incomplete; it gives a book title and edition but no authors or publisher.
  5. [Table I] The statement 'Mv = Mw' assumes negligible polydispersity, but the authors note that the polydispersity index was not available; the assumption should be stated explicitly in the text.
  6. [Section IV, film lifetime] The sentence 'This may be expected since the film can pop due to an instability that forms anywhere in the film' is vague; specifying the likely instability would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims rest on direct measurements and external benchmarks; the dripping-thread proxy is an inference about representativeness, not a definitional or self-citation-based reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained against external data and does not reduce to its own inputs. The extensional characterization is a direct measurement (thread rupture length in dripping drops), not a fitted parameter or a quantity defined by the target claim. Molecular parameters (Rg and c*) are obtained from literature scaling formulas and tabulated separately, and the recommended concentrations for giant bubbles come from the Soap Bubble Wiki, an external benchmark. Film thickness and lifetime conclusions come from independent IR absorption experiments. The statement that extensional rheology is the most important factor in creating the films is supported by the correlation between rupture-length behavior and the externally supplied concentration ranges, together with the physical argument that flow away from the rope is extensional; this is an empirical inference rather than a tautology. The only self-citations are methodological (ref. [18] for drop-shape analysis; ref. [28] for pinch-off phenomenology) and are not load-bearing. The paper explicitly flags the polydispersity mechanism as a hypothesis in Section V ('One main finding of this work that requires further investigation...', 'Dedicated extensional rheology experiments and molecular dynamics simulations may help to shed light...') and notes in Section III that the oscillations in Fig. 2C are 'likely specific to our dripping experiment.' These are limitation statements about proxy transferability and mechanism uncertainty; they lower confidence in the inference, but they are not circular reasoning. No equation, fitted value, or self-citation chain makes a prediction equivalent to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data. The paper relies on literature-scaling relations and on two load-bearing domain assumptions: the dripping-thread proxy and the minor role of surface rheology. The proposed polymer clustering and depletion mechanism is a hypothesis, not an invented entity with independent evidence.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Thread rupture length in dripping drops is a faithful proxy for extensional rheology during soap film pulling.
    Stated as an analogy in Section III, but not independently validated against actual giant bubble formation.
  • domain assumption Surface viscoelastic effects are minor relative to bulk extensional rheology for film formation.
    Section V states this as a suspicion based on concentration agreement; no surface rheology measurements are made.
  • domain assumption Monodisperse PEO samples have Mv = Mw, meaning negligible polydispersity.
    Stated in the Table I caption; polydispersity indices were not available for the samples.
  • domain assumption The radius of gyration scaling Rg = 0.02 M^0.58 nm and the overlap concentration formula from references [35-37] apply to these PEO solutions.
    Used to compute the overlap concentrations in Table I; adopted from prior empirical literature.
  • domain assumption The Beer-Lambert relation in Eq. (2) gives film thickness, with reflection effects negligible.
    The authors verify detector linearity and cite reference [56]; the reflection correction is small but not independently measured.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of How to make a giant bubble." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IE3EOVSA

@misc{pith2026190800537,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: How to make a giant bubble},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IE3EOVSA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.00537}
}
abstract

Using mixtures of soap, water, and long chain polymers, free-floating soap bubbles can be formed with volumes approaching 100 m$^3$. Here we investigate how such thin films are created and maintained over time. We show how the extensional rheology is the most important factor in creating the bubble, and how polydispersity in molecular weight of the solvated polymers leads to better performance at lower concentrations. Additionally, using IR absorption, we measure soap film thickness profiles and film lifetimes. Although the initial thickness mostly depends on the choice of detergent, polymers can dramatically increase film lifetime at high molecular weights and high concentrations, although such high concentrations can inhibit the initial film formation. Thus, the ideal concentration of polymer additives for making giant bubbles requires a robust viscoelastic rheology during extension, and is aided by long film lifetimes during gravitational drainage and evaporation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.00537 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. B shows a representation of a soap film being pulled from a rope of diameter d with a characteristic velocity v. Near the rope where the velocity is zero at the boundary, the fluid is sheared with a characteristic shear rate γ˙ ≈ v/d. For a 1 mm rope with a film velocity of U = 1 m/s, the shear rate is 1000 s−1 . This is an upper bound and the highest shear rate we tested in our shear rheology. However, away from th… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A-B shows images of two drops immediately after detachment from the joining thread. Without the addition of polymers, the thread resembles that of pure water and other low-viscosity pure liquids [28]. When 3.0 g/l of guar is added, the thread length increases dramatically. At higher concentrations, the length of the thread prior to rupture seems to diverge, and the drop leaves the imaging region before the thread ru… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Film thickness profiles at 3 different times for a soap + water solution ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    GuinnessWorldRecords, https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/largest-free-floating-soap-bubble , [Accessed: 29-June-2019]

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    R. E. Goldstein, H. K. Moffatt, A. I. Pesci, and R. L. Ricca, Soap-film m´’obius strip changes topology with a twist singularity, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.107, 21979 (2010)

    work page 2010

  3. [3]

    Rivera, P

    M. Rivera, P. Vorobieff, and R. E. Ecke, Turbulence in flowing soap films: Velocity, vorticity, and thickness fields, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1417 (1998)

    1998

  4. [4]

    Ristroph and J

    L. Ristroph and J. Zhang, Anomalous hydrodynamic drafting of interacting flapping flags, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 194502 (2008)

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

    Salkin, A

    L. Salkin, A. Schmit, P. Panizza, and L. Courbin, Generating soap bubbles by blowing on soap films, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 077801 (2016). 11

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Poulain, E

    S. Poulain, E. Villermaux, and L. Bourouiba, Ageing and burst of surface bubbles, J. Fluid. Mech.851, 636 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Isenberg, Soap films and bubbles, Phys

    C. Isenberg, Soap films and bubbles, Phys. Educ.16, 218 (1981)

    work page 1981

  8. [8]

    R´’amme, Reflected laser light from a soap bubble - a demonstration experiment, Phys

    G. R´’amme, Reflected laser light from a soap bubble - a demonstration experiment, Phys. Educ.27, 282 (1992)

    work page 1992

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    R´’amme, Surface tension from deflating a soap bubble, Phys

    G. R´’amme, Surface tension from deflating a soap bubble, Phys. Educ.32, 191 (1997)

    1997

  2. [10]

    Schilling and M

    K. Schilling and M. Zessner, Foam in the aquatic environment, Water Res.45, 4355 (2011)

    2011

  3. [11]

    html, [Accessed: 11-July-2019]

    Toxic foam floods the streets of Bangalore,https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/31/asia/india-toxic-foam-lake/index. html, [Accessed: 11-July-2019]

    2017

  4. [12]

    Soap Bubble Wiki,https://soapbubble.fandom.com, [Accessed: 29-June-2019]

    2019

  5. [13]

    (CRC Press, 2011)

    Physics of Continuous Matter, 2nd ed. (CRC Press, 2011)

    2011

  6. [14]

    P. G. de Gennes, “young” soap films, Langmuir17, 2416 (2001)

    2001

  7. [15]

    (Springer, 2004)

    Capillarity and Wetting Phenomena: Drops, Bubbles, Pearls, Waves, 1st ed. (Springer, 2004)

    2004

  8. [16]

    Cohen, B

    C. Cohen, B. D. Texier, E. Reyssat, J. H. Snoeijer, D. Quéré, and C. Clanet, On the shape of giant soap bubbles, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA114, 2515 (2017)

    2017

  9. [17]

    Mudgil, S

    D. Mudgil, S. Barak, and B. S. Khatkar, Guar gum: processing, properties and food applications–a review, J. Food Sci. Technol. 51, 409 (2014)

    2014

  10. [18]

    J. C. Burton, F. M. Huisman, P. Alison, D. Rogerson, and P. Taborek, Experimental and numerical investigation of the equilibrium geometry of liquid lenses, Langmuir26, 15316 (2010)

    2010

  11. [19]

    E. A. van Nierop, B. Scheid, and H. A. Stone, On the thickness of soap films: an alternative to frankel’s law, J. Fluid Mech. 602, 119 (2008)

    2008

  12. [20]

    B. H. Zimm, Dynamics of polymer molecules in dilute solution: Viscoelasticity, flow birefringence and dielectric loss, J. Chem. Phys. 24, 269 (1956)

    1956

  13. [21]

    Wagner, Y

    C. Wagner, Y. Amarouchene, D. Bonn, and J. Eggers, Droplet detachment and satellite bead formation in viscoelastic fluids, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 164504 (2005)

    2005

  14. [22]

    Clasen, J

    C. Clasen, J. P. Plog, W.-M. Kulicke, M. Owens, C. Macosko, L. E. Scriven, M. Verani, and G. H. McKinley, How dilute are dilute solutions in extensional flows?, J. Rheol.50, 849 (2006)

    2006

  15. [23]

    Palangetic, N

    L. Palangetic, N. K. Reddy, S. Srinivasan, R. E. Cohen, G. H. McKinley, and C. Clasen, Dispersity and spinnability: Why highly polydisperse polymer solutions are desirable for electrospinning, Polymer55, 4920 (2014)

    2014

  16. [24]

    Del Giudice, S

    F. Del Giudice, S. J. Haward, and A. Q. Shen, Relaxation time of dilute polymer solutions: A microfluidic approach, J. Rheol. 61, 327 (2017)

    2017

  17. [25]

    G. H. McKinley and T. Sridhar, Filament-stretching rheometry of complex fluids, Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech.34, 375 (2002)

    2002

  18. [26]

    Dinic, L

    J. Dinic, L. N. Jimenez, and V. Sharma, Pinch-off dynamics and dripping-onto-substrate (dos) rheometry of complex fluids, Lab Chip 17, 460 (2017)

    2017

  19. [27]

    Dinic and V

    J. Dinic and V. Sharma, Macromolecular relaxation, strain, and extensibility determine elastocapillary thinning and extensional viscosity of polymer solutions, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.116, 8766 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    J. C. Burton, J. E. Rutledge, and P. Taborek, Fluid pinch-off in superfluid and normal he4, Phys. Rev. E 75, 036311 (2007)

    2007

  21. [29]

    P. P. Bhat, S. Appathurai, M. T. Harris, M. Pasquali, G. H. McKinley, and O. A. Basaran, Formation of beads-on-a-string structures during break-up of viscoelastic filaments, Nature Phys.6, 625 (2010)

    2010

  22. [30]

    de Sainte Claire, Degradation of peo in the solid state: A theoretical kinetic model, Macromolecules42, 3469 (2009)

    P. de Sainte Claire, Degradation of peo in the solid state: A theoretical kinetic model, Macromolecules42, 3469 (2009)

    2009

  23. [31]

    Morlat and J.-L

    S. Morlat and J.-L. Gardette, Phototransformation of water-soluble polymers. i: photo- and thermooxidation of poly(ethylene oxide) in solid state, Polymer42, 6071 (2001)

    2001

  24. [32]

    Dupas, I

    A. Dupas, I. Hénaut, J.-F. Argillier, and T. Aubry, Mechanical degradation onset of polyethylene oxide used as a hydrosol- uble model polymer for enhanced oil recovery, Oil & Gas Sci. Tech.67, 931 (2012)

    2012

  25. [33]

    B. A. Buchholz, J. M. Zahn, M. Kenward, G. W. Slater, and A. E. Barron, Flow-induced chain scission as a physical route to narrowly distributed, high molar mass polymers, Polymer45, 1223 (2004)

    2004

  26. [34]

    A. J. M´’uller, J. A. Odell, and S. Carrington, Degradation of semidilute polymer solutions in elongational flows, Polymer 33, 2598 (1992)

    1992

  27. [35]

    Tabaka, N

    R.Holyst, A.Bielejewska, J.Szymański, A.Wilk, A.Patkowski, J.Gapiński, A.Żywociński, T.Kalwarczyk, E.Kalwarczyk, M. Tabaka, N. Ziębacz, and S. A. Wieczorek, Scaling form of viscosity at all length-scales in poly(ethylene glycol) solutions studied by fluorescence correlation spe...

    2009

  28. [36]

    Devan, , and J

    K. Devan, , and J. C. Selser, Asymptotic behavior and long-range interactions in aqueous solutions of polyethylene oxide), Macromolecules 24, 5943 (1991)

    1991

  29. [37]

    Ying and B

    Q. Ying and B. Chu, Overlap concentration of macromolecules in solution, Macromolecules20, 362 (1987)

    1987

  30. [38]

    M. M. Cross, Polymer rheology: Influence of molecular weight and polydispersity, J. Appl. Polym. Sci.13, 765 (1969)

    1969

  31. [39]

    Kulicke, M

    W.-M. Kulicke, M. Elasabee, C. D. Eisenbach, and M. Peuscher, Effect of molecular weight and molecular weight distri- bution on the rheological properties of aqueous poly(ethylene oxide) solution, Polymer Bulletin9, 190 (1983)

    1983

  32. [40]

    P. K. Bhattacharjee, J. P. Oberhauser, G. H. McKinley, L. G. Leal, and T. Sridhar, Extensional rheometry of entangled solutions, Macromolecules 35, 10131 (2002)

    2002

  33. [41]

    X. Ye, R. G. Larson, C. Pattamaprom, and T. Sridhar, Extensional properties of monodisperse and bidisperse polystyrene solutions, J. Rheol.47, 443 (2003)

    2003

  34. [42]

    Ye and T

    X. Ye and T. Sridhar, Effects of the polydispersity on rheological properties of entangled polystyrene solutions, Macro- molecules 38, 3442 (2005)

    2005

  35. [43]

    (Pergamon Press, 1959)

    Soap films: studies of their thinning, 1st ed. (Pergamon Press, 1959). 12

    1959

  36. [44]

    Champougny, J

    L. Champougny, J. Miguet, R. Henaff, F. Restagno, F. Foulogne, and E. Rio, Influence of evaporation on soap film rupture, Langmuir 34, 3221 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    Saulnier, L

    L. Saulnier, L. Champougny, G. Bastien, F. Restagno, D. Langevin, and E. Rio, A study of generation and rupture of soap films, Soft Matter10, 2899 (2014)

    2014

  38. [46]

    Naire, R

    S. Naire, R. J. Braun, and S. A. Snow, An insoluble surfactant model for a vertical draining free film, J. Colloid. Int. Sci. 230, 91 (2000)

    2000

  39. [47]

    S. Berg, E. A. Adelizzi, and S. M. Troian, Experimental study of entrainment and drainage flows in microscale soap films, Langmuir 21, 3867 (2005)

    2005

  40. [48]

    L. W. Schwartz and R. V. Roy, Modeling draining flow in mobile and immobile soap films, J. Colloid Interface Sci.218, 309 (1999)

    1999

  41. [49]

    Langevin, Influence of interfacial rheology on foam and emulsion properties, Adv

    D. Langevin, Influence of interfacial rheology on foam and emulsion properties, Adv. Colloid Int. Sci.88, 209 (2000)

    2000

  42. [50]

    Seiwert, B

    J. Seiwert, B. Dollet, and I. Cantat, Theoretical study of the generation of soap films: role of interfacial visco-elasticity, J. Fluid Mech. 739, 124 (2014)

    2014

  43. [51]

    A. A. Sonin, A. Bonfillon, and D. Langevin, Thinning of soap films: The role of surface viscoelasticity, J. Colloid. Int. Sci. 162, 323 (1994)

    1994

  44. [52]

    Bruinsma, J

    R. Bruinsma, J. di Meglio, D. Quéré, and S. Cohen-Addad, Stabilization of aqueous foam by hydrosoluble polymers. 1. sodium dodecyl sulfate-poly(ethylene oxide) system, Langmuir8, 324 (1992)

    1992

  45. [53]

    E. A. Adelizzi and S. M. Troian, Interfacial slip in entrained soap films containing associating hydrosoluble polymer, Langmuir 20, 7482 (2004)

    2004

  46. [54]

    Bruinsma, J

    R. Bruinsma, J. di Meglio, D. Quéré, and S. Cohen-Addad, Formation of soap films from polymer solutions, Langmuir8, 3161 (1992)

    1992

  47. [55]

    Cohen-Addad and J.-M

    S. Cohen-Addad and J.-M. di Meglio, Stabilization of aqueous foam by hydrosoluble polymers. 2. role of polymer/surfactant interactions, Langmuir 10, 773 (1994)

    1994

  48. [56]

    X. L. Wu, R. Levine, M. Rutgers, H. Kellay, and W. I. Goldburg, Infrared technique for measuring thickness of a flowing soap film, Rev. Sci. Instrum.72, 2467 (2001)

    2001

  49. [57]

    Debrégeas, P.-G

    G. Debrégeas, P.-G. de Gennes, and F. Brochard-Wyart, The life and death of “bare” viscous bubbles, Science279, 1704 (1998)

    1998

  50. [58]

    M. S. Bhamla, C. Chai, M. A. Àlvarez Valenzuela, J. Tajuelo, and G. G. Fuller, Interfacial mechanisms for stability of surfactant-laden films, PLoS One12, e0175753 (2017)

    2017

  51. [59]

    B. H. Cao and M. W. Kim, Molecular weight dependence of the surface tension of aqueous poly(ethylene oxide) solutions, Faraday Discuss.98, 245 (1994)

    1994

  52. [60]

    Zhang and R

    W. Zhang and R. G. Larson, Tension-induced nematic phase separation in bidisperse homopolymer melts, ACS Cent. Sci. 4, 1545 (2018)

    2018

  53. [61]

    S. M. Clegg, P. A. Williams, P. Warren, and I. D. Robb, Phase behavior of polymers with concentrated dispersions of surfactants, Langmuir 10, 3390 (1994)

    1994

  54. [62]

    Helfand and G

    E. Helfand and G. H. Fredreickson, Large fluctuations in polymer solutions under shear, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 2468 (1989)

    1989

  55. [63]

    S. T. Milner, Hydrodynamics of semidilute polymer solutions, Phys. Rev. Lett.66, 1477 (1991)

    1991

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.