pith. sign in

arxiv: 2601.15045 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-21 · ❄️ cond-mat.soft · cond-mat.mtrl-sci· physics.flu-dyn

Coupled gas and bubble dynamics at the solidification front

Bastien Isabella , C\'ecile Monteux , Sylvain Deville This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 12:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.soft cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.flu-dyn
keywords bubble nucleationsolidification frontgas diffusioncarbonated watercharacteristic timecryo-confocal microscopycritical concentration
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bubble nucleation at the solidification front is governed by a characteristic time emerging from competing gas diffusion, nucleation kinetics, bubble growth, and front advance.

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

The paper tracks real-time bubble formation in solidifying carbonated water using fluorescence microscopy while changing how fast the solidification front moves. It finds that bubbles appear only after a specific characteristic time that is set by gas building up in the liquid ahead of the front, the rate at which nuclei form, how quickly bubbles expand, and the front continuing to advance and potentially engulf them. This balance explains why nucleation depends on front speed and lets the authors calculate the critical dissolved-gas level at which bubbles start to form. Readers care because the same process shapes the internal structure and strength of many frozen materials, from metals to ice, so controlling the timing could improve or avoid bubbles in manufacturing.

Core claim

Bubble nucleation during solidification is controlled by a characteristic nucleation time that arises from the simultaneous action of gas diffusion in the liquid layer ahead of the front, the kinetics of bubble formation, the expansion of existing bubbles, and the constant advance of the solidification front itself. Experiments varying the front speed from 1 to 20 micrometers per second show that this time scale determines whether bubbles nucleate and become entrapped, enabling an estimate of the critical dissolved gas concentration required for nucleation in carbonated water.

What carries the argument

the characteristic nucleation time, the time scale set by the competition among gas diffusion ahead of the front, nucleation kinetics, bubble growth, and the velocity of the advancing solidification front

If this is right

  • The critical gas concentration needed for nucleation can be estimated from the characteristic time for any given solidification velocity.
  • Bubble entrapment can be tuned by changing front speed to either promote or suppress nucleation relative to the time scale.
  • The same competition determines whether bubbles form in other constant-gradient solidification processes.
  • Microstructure predictions in solidifying materials can incorporate this time scale to forecast bubble distribution.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The characteristic time may appear in non-aqueous systems such as metal alloys if the same four processes dominate.
  • Extending the model to predict final bubble sizes or spacings would require only measuring how growth rate depends on the same time scale.
  • Varying the thermal gradient while holding velocity fixed could test whether the time scale remains the controlling variable.

Load-bearing premise

The measured nucleation times result purely from the balance of diffusion, kinetics, growth, and front speed without substantial interference from surface effects, impurities, or other unmeasured factors, and that carbonated water behaves like broader solidification systems.

What would settle it

Direct measurements of nucleation times when gas concentration is varied independently at fixed front velocity, showing times that deviate from the dependence predicted by the characteristic time scale.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.15045 by Bastien Isabella, C\'ecile Monteux, Sylvain Deville.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Experimental setup for cryo-confocal microscopy. A constant temperature gradient ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Representative images obtained through confocal cryomicroscopy. These time-lapse sequences of typical two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Evolution of the nucleation rate of bubbles as a function of the velocity of solidification [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Cumulative number of nucleated bubbles as a function of solidification duration under varying velocities. Multiple [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Evolution of the area occupied by bubbles and the sum of nucleated bubbles in the field of view of the microscope as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Temporal evolution of the area occupied by bubbles during the stages of nucleation, growth, and engulfment [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Temporal dynamics of gas bubble evolution during solidification as a function of solidification velocity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Bubble nucleation distance from the solidification front. (A) Measurement of bubble nucleation distances [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Gas segregation profile at the solidification front during solidification process and estimation of the critical nucleation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The formation and entrapment of gas bubbles during solidification significantly influence the microstructure and mechanical properties of materials, from metallic alloys to ice. While gas segregation at the solidification front is well-documented, the real-time dynamics of bubble nucleation, growth, and engulfment-and their dependence on solidification velocity-remain poorly understood. In this study, we use in situ cryo-confocal fluorescence microscopy to investigate the coupled gas-bubble dynamics at the solidification front of carbonated water, systematically varying the solidification velocity ($V = 1-20 \mu m/s$) while maintaining a constant thermal gradient ($G = 15 K/mm$). Our experiments reveal that bubble nucleation is governed by a characteristic nucleation time, which emerges from the interplay between gas diffusion ahead of the front, nucleation kinetics, and bubble growth, all competing with the advancing solidification front. These results allow us to estimate the critical gas concentration for bubbles nucleation in carbonated water. These results offer a detailed understanding of the mechanisms controlling bubble nucleation and entrapment during solidification at constant thermal gradient. They contribute to the development of strategies to control bubble formation in industrial processes where the presence of bubbles can either be detrimental or intentionally harnessed.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses in situ cryo-confocal fluorescence microscopy to study bubble nucleation, growth, and entrapment at the solidification front in carbonated water. With solidification velocity varied from 1–20 μm/s at fixed thermal gradient G = 15 K/mm, the authors report a characteristic nucleation time that they attribute to the competition among gas diffusion ahead of the front, nucleation kinetics, bubble growth, and front advance; this time scale is used to estimate the critical gas concentration for nucleation.

Significance. If the measured time scale can be shown to arise from the claimed bulk-process competition rather than heterogeneous sites, the work would supply direct, velocity-dependent observations of coupled gas–solidification dynamics that are relevant to microstructure control in metallic alloys, ice, and other materials where bubbles affect mechanical properties.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the characteristic nucleation time 'emerges from the interplay' between diffusion, kinetics, growth, and front motion is presented without quantitative data, error bars, image-analysis protocols, or statistical support for the waiting-time measurements, preventing verification of the proposed mechanism from the available text.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and experimental description: the attribution of the observed nucleation time solely to bulk processes (gas diffusion ahead of the front, nucleation kinetics, bubble growth, front advance) rests on the untested assumption that heterogeneous nucleation on impurities, container walls, or substrate roughness is negligible. No controls on dissolved-impurity levels, wall chemistry, or surface roughness are described, yet heterogeneous nucleation is known to dominate in carbonated-water systems at the reported low velocities (1–20 μm/s).
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the sentence 'These results allow us to estimate the critical gas concentration' does not indicate the numerical value obtained or the fitting procedure used, which would aid immediate assessment of the result.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive feedback, which has prompted us to strengthen the presentation of our quantitative results and to explicitly address the possible role of heterogeneous nucleation. We have revised the abstract and added a new discussion subsection to incorporate these points.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that the characteristic nucleation time 'emerges from the interplay' between diffusion, kinetics, growth, and front motion is presented without quantitative data, error bars, image-analysis protocols, or statistical support for the waiting-time measurements, preventing verification of the proposed mechanism from the available text.

    Authors: We agree that the original abstract was too concise to convey the supporting data. In the revised manuscript we have updated the abstract to report the measured nucleation times (0.5–8 s range, with standard deviations from >50 independent events per velocity) and their systematic increase with V. We also explicitly reference the image-analysis pipeline (threshold-based bubble detection with manual verification) and the statistical protocol (exponential waiting-time fits with 95% confidence intervals) that are fully detailed in the Methods and Results sections. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and experimental description: the attribution of the observed nucleation time solely to bulk processes (gas diffusion ahead of the front, nucleation kinetics, bubble growth, front advance) rests on the untested assumption that heterogeneous nucleation on impurities, container walls, or substrate roughness is negligible. No controls on dissolved-impurity levels, wall chemistry, or surface roughness are described, yet heterogeneous nucleation is known to dominate in carbonated-water systems at the reported low velocities (1–20 μm/s).

    Authors: We acknowledge that heterogeneous nucleation cannot be ruled out a priori. However, the observed nucleation time increases monotonically with solidification velocity V, a dependence that is predicted by the bulk competition model (diffusion length ~ D/V, growth time ~ R_crit/V) but would be absent for velocity-independent heterogeneous sites. In the revision we have added a new paragraph that (i) describes the filtration (0.2 μm) and degassing protocol used to reduce dissolved impurities, (ii) notes the use of freshly cleaned glass substrates, and (iii) discusses why the V-dependence favors the bulk mechanism. We also state explicitly that dedicated AFM roughness measurements were not performed and list this as a limitation. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Experimental observations of nucleation time show no reduction to fitted inputs or self-citation chains

full rationale

The paper reports direct in-situ microscopy measurements of bubble nucleation times across a range of solidification velocities at fixed thermal gradient. The claimed characteristic nucleation time is presented as an observed quantity emerging from competing processes, with the critical concentration estimate following from those observations rather than from any model equation that is defined in terms of its own output. No load-bearing derivation step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, nor does any uniqueness theorem or ansatz rely on self-citation. The central result remains an empirical finding whose validity rests on experimental controls rather than internal definitional closure.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the experimental observation of a characteristic nucleation time whose value is extracted from the data; the only explicit controlled parameter is the fixed thermal gradient. No mathematical axioms or new physical entities are introduced in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • critical gas concentration
    Estimated from the observed nucleation times; numerical value not given in abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Thermal gradient remains constant at 15 K/mm while velocity is varied
    Stated as the experimental condition that isolates velocity dependence.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5512 in / 1273 out tokens · 56520 ms · 2026-05-16T12:04:36.884202+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J. Ahn, M. Headly, M. Wahlen, E. J. Brook, P. A. Mayewski, and K. C. Taylor,co 2 diffusion in polar ice: observations from naturally formedco 2 spikes in the siple dome (antarctica) ice core, Journal of Glaciology54, 685 (2008)

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    A. J. Gow and D. Langston,Growth history of lake ice in relation to its stratigraphic, crystalline and mechanical structure, 77 (Department of Defense, Army, Corps of Engineers, Cold Regions Research and Technology, 1977)

    work page 1977

  3. [3]

    C. A. Knight and N. C. Knight, The final freezing of spongy ice: Hailstone collection techniques and interpretations of structures, Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology7, 875 (1968)

    work page 1968

  4. [4]

    Zhang, Nucleation, growth, transport, and entrapment of inclusions during steel casting, Journal of Metals65, 1138 (2013)

    L. Zhang, Nucleation, growth, transport, and entrapment of inclusions during steel casting, Journal of Metals65, 1138 (2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    H. Li, E. Ghezal, A. Nehari, G. Alombert-Goget, A. Brenier, and K. Lebbou, Bubbles defects distribution in sapphire bulk crystals grown by czochralski technique, Optical Materials35, 1071 (2013)

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    Bouaita, G

    R. Bouaita, G. Alombert-Goget, E. Ghezal, A. Nehari, O. Benamara, M. Benchiheub, G. Cagnoli, K. Yamamoto, X. Xu, V. Motto-Ros,et al., Seed orientation and pulling rate effects on bubbles and strain distribution on a sapphire crystal grown by the micro-pulling down method, CrystEngComm21, 4200 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    H. Liu, J. Jiang, and W. Zhai, Bubble freeze casting artificial rattan, Chemical Engineering Journal449, 137870 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    K¨ orber, Phenomena at the advancing ice–liquid interface: solutes, particles and biological cells, Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics21, 229 (1988)

    C. K¨ orber, Phenomena at the advancing ice–liquid interface: solutes, particles and biological cells, Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics21, 229 (1988)

    work page 1988

  9. [9]

    Ghezal, A

    E. Ghezal, A. Nehari, K. Lebbou, and T. Duffar, Observation of gas bubble incorporation during micropulling-down growth of sapphire, Crystal Growth & Design12, 5715 (2012)

    work page 2012

  10. [10]

    Tyagi, H

    S. Tyagi, H. Huynh, C. Monteux, and S. Deville, Objects interacting with solidification fronts: Thermal and solute effects, Materialia12, 100802 (2020)

    work page 2020

  11. [11]

    Asthana and S

    R. Asthana and S. Tewari, The engulfment of foreign particles by a freezing interface, Journal of Materials Science28, 5414 (1993)

    work page 1993

  12. [12]

    D. M. Stefanescu, B. Dhindaw, S. Kacar, and A. Moitra, Behavior of ceramic particles at the solid-liquid metal interface in metal matrix composites, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A19, 2847 (1988)

    work page 1988

  13. [13]

    Tyagi, C

    S. Tyagi, C. Monteux, and S. Deville, Solute effects on the dynamics and deformation of emulsion droplets during freezing, Soft Matter18, 4178 (2022)

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    Tiller, K

    W. Tiller, K. Jackson, J. Rutter, and B. Chalmers, The redistribution of solute atoms during the solidification of metals, Acta Metallurgica1, 428 (1953)

    work page 1953

  15. [15]

    Yoshimura, T

    K. Yoshimura, T. Inada, and S. Koyama, Growth of spherical and cylindrical oxygen bubbles at an ice- water interface, Crystal Growth and Design8, 2108 (2008)

    work page 2008

  16. [16]

    W. Kurz, D. Fisher, and M. Rappaz,Fundamentals of solidification(Trans Tech Publications ltd, 2023)

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    R. G. Pohl, Solute redistribution by recrystallization, Journal of Applied Physics25, 1170 (1954)

    work page 1954

  18. [18]

    Wettlaufer, Impurity effects in the premelting of ice, Physical Review Letters82, 2516 (1999)

    J. Wettlaufer, Impurity effects in the premelting of ice, Physical Review Letters82, 2516 (1999)

    work page 1999

  19. [19]

    Dedovets, C

    D. Dedovets, C. Monteux, and S. Deville, Five-dimensional imaging of freezing emulsions with solute effects, Science360, 303 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Becker and W

    R. Becker and W. D¨ oring, Kinetische behandlung der keimbildung in ¨ ubers¨ attigten d¨ ampfen, Annalen der Physik416, 719 (1935)

    work page 1935

  21. [21]

    Volmer and A

    M. Volmer and A. Weber, Keimbildung in ¨ ubers¨ attigten gebilden, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physikalische Chemie119, 277 (1926)

    work page 1926

  22. [22]

    Frenkel,Kinetic theory of liquids(Clarendon Press, 1946)

    J. Frenkel,Kinetic theory of liquids(Clarendon Press, 1946)

    work page 1946

  23. [23]

    C. Ward, A. Balakrishnan, and F. Hooper, On the thermodynamics of nucleation in weak gas-liquid solutions, Journal of Basic Engineering92, 695 (1970)

    work page 1970

  24. [24]

    P. G. Bowers, C. Hofstetter, C. R. Letter, and R. T. Toomey, Supersaturation limit for homogeneous nucleation of oxygen bubbles in water at elevated pressure:” super-henry’s law”, The Journal of Physical Chemistry99, 9632 (1995)

    work page 1995

  25. [25]

    R. A. Sunyaev, ed., On the theory of new phase formation. cavitation, inChemical Physics and Hydrodynanics(Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1992) pp. 120–137

    work page 1992

  26. [26]

    Baidakov and K

    V. Baidakov and K. Bobrov, Spontaneous cavitation in a lennard-jones liquid at negative pressures, The Journal of Chemical Physics140(2014)

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    V. I. Kalikmanov, Classical nucleation theory, inNucleation theory(Springer, 2012) pp. 17–41

    work page 2012

  28. [28]

    Blander and J

    M. Blander and J. L. Katz, Bubble nucleation in liquids, AIChE Journal21, 833 (1975)

    work page 1975

  29. [29]

    Jones, G

    S. Jones, G. Evans, and K. Galvin, Bubble nucleation from gas cavities—a review, Advances in Colloid and Interface Science80, 27 (1999)

    work page 1999

  30. [30]

    Y. E. Geguzin and A. Dzuba, Crystallization of a gas-saturated melt, Journal of Crystal Growth52, 337 (1981)

    work page 1981

  31. [31]

    G. Lipp, C. K¨ orber, S. Englich, U. Hartmann, and G. Rau, Investigation of the behavior of dissolved gases during freezing, Cryobiology24, 489 (1987)

    work page 1987

  32. [32]

    S. A. Bari and J. Hallett, Nucleation and growth of bubbles at an ice–water interface, Journal of Glaciology13, 489–520 (1974). 14

    work page 1974

  33. [33]

    J. G. Meijer, D. Rocha, A. M. Linnenbank, C. Diddens, and D. Lohse, Enhanced bubble growth near an advancing solidification front, Journal of Fluid Mechanics996, A22 (2024)

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Werner, M

    T. Werner, M. Becker, J. Baumann, C. Pickmann, L. Sturz, and F. Kargl, In situ observation of the impact of hydrogen bubbles in Al–Cu melt on directional dendritic solidification, Journal of Materials Science56, 8225 (2021)

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    F. Cao, R. Wang, P. Zhang, T. Wang, and K. Song, In situ investigation of microstructural evolution and intermetallic compounds formation at liquid al/solid cu interface by synchrotron x-ray radiography, Materials15, 10.3390/ma15165647 (2022)

    work page doi:10.3390/ma15165647 2022

  36. [36]

    K. F. Vasconcellos and J. Beech, The development of blowholes in the ice/water/carbon dioxide system, Journal of Crystal Growth28, 85 (1975)

    work page 1975

  37. [37]

    Murakami and H

    K. Murakami and H. Nakajima, Formation of pores during unidirectional solidification of water containing carbon dioxide, Materials Transactions43, 2582 (2002)

    work page 2002

  38. [38]

    Maeno, Air bubble formation in ice crystals, Physics of Snow and Ice : proceedings1, 207 (1967)

    N. Maeno, Air bubble formation in ice crystals, Physics of Snow and Ice : proceedings1, 207 (1967)

    work page 1967

  39. [39]

    Zhdanov, G

    A. Zhdanov, G. Satunkin, V. Tatarchenko, and N. Talyanskaya, Cylindrical pores in a growing crystal, Journal of Crystal Growth49, 659 (1980)

    work page 1980

  40. [40]

    Thi´ evenaz, J

    V. Thi´ evenaz, J. G. Meijer, D. Lohse, and A. Sauret, On the shape of air bubbles trapped in ice, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences122, e2415027122 (2025)

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    P. S. Wei, Y. K. Kuo, S. H. Chiu, and C. Y. Ho, Shape of a pore trapped in solid during solidification, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer43, 263 (2000)

    work page 2000

  42. [42]

    Wei and S

    P. Wei and S. Hsiao, Effects of solidification rate on pore shape in solid, International Journal of Thermal Sciences115, 79 (2017)

    work page 2017

  43. [43]

    Carte, Air bubbles in ice, Proceedings of the Physical Society77, 757 (1961)

    A. Carte, Air bubbles in ice, Proceedings of the Physical Society77, 757 (1961)

    work page 1961

  44. [44]

    A. W. Rempel and M. G. Worster, Particle trapping at an advancing solidification front with interfacial-curvature effects, J. Cryst. Growth223, 420 (2001)

    work page 2001

  45. [45]

    M. S. Park, A. A. Golovin, and S. H. Davis, The encapsulation of particles and bubbles by an advancing solidification front, J. Fluid Mech.560, 415 (2006)

    work page 2006

  46. [46]

    P. S. Wei, C. C. Huang, Z. P. Wang, K. Y. Chen, and C. H. Lin, Growths of bubble/pore sizes in solid during solidifica- tion—an in situ measurement and analysis, Journal of Crystal Growth270, 662 (2004)

    work page 2004

  47. [47]

    Kato, Pore nucleation in solidifying high-purity copper, Metall Mater Trans A30, 123 (1999)

    E. Kato, Pore nucleation in solidifying high-purity copper, Metall Mater Trans A30, 123 (1999)

    work page 1999

  48. [48]

    O. M. Bunoiu, T. Duffar, and I. Nicoara, Gas bubbles in shaped sapphire, Progress in Crystal Growth and Characterization of Materials56, 123 (2010)

    work page 2010