ARTICLE

pubs.acs.org/jchemeduc

Can a Siphon Work In Vacuo?

Adrian L. Boatwright,* Simon Puttick, and Peter Licence*

Downloaded by UNIV NACIONAL AUTONOMA MEXICO on September 3, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org

Publication Date (Web): September 8, 2011 | doi: 10.1021/ed2001818

School of Chemistry, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, United Kingdom
ABSTRACT: Used since the time of the ancient Egyptians as a method for transferring liquids
from one vessel to another, the siphon is a dependable tool. Although, the act of siphoning beer
from a fermentation barrel or wine from a demijohn is a skill that has been passed down from
generation to generation, do we really know how the siphon works? It is widely believed that the
siphon is principally driven by the force of atmospheric pressure. An experiment is described that
shows that a siphon can function even under high-vacuum conditions. Molecular cohesion and
gravity are shown to be contributing factors in the operation of a siphon; the presence of a positive
atmospheric pressure is not required.
KEYWORDS: First-Year Undergraduate/General, General Public, High School/Introductory
Chemistry, Demonstrations, Physical Chemistry, Public Understanding/Outreach, Misconceptions/Discrepant Events, Laboratory Equipment/Apparatus, Materials Science, Physical Properties

sed since the time of the ancient Egyptians as a method for

transferring liquids from one vessel to another, the siphon is
a dependable tool (Figure 1). Although, the act of siphoning beer
from a fermentation barrel or wine from a demijohn is a skill that
has been passed down from generation to generation, do we
really know how the siphon works? It is widely believed that the
siphon is principally driven by the force of atmospheric pressure.
An experiment is described that shows that a siphon can function
even under high-vacuum conditions. Molecular cohesion and
gravity are shown to be contributing factors in the operation of
a siphon; the presence of a positive atmospheric pressure is not
required.
Described simply as a device that enables the transfer of a
liquid from a higher to a lower level by the force of gravity and
hydrostatic pressure, the principle operation behind the siphon
has proved to be less obvious than it would rst appear. Much of
this misconception lies in the belief that liquids cannot sustain a
substantial tension and that the upward ow within the siphon
is dependent on atmospheric pressure. So widespread is this
confusion that in a number of recent articles on this topic2,3 it was
pointed out that the current denition in the Oxford English
Dictionary, among many others, is wrong in stating that the
principal force in the operation of the siphon is atmospheric
pressure and not gravity. With a number of articles oering
explanations as to the underlying principle,2
8 this is clearly a
topic of continued debate.

Figure 1. Detail taken from a relief panel from the tomb of Amenophis
II at Thebes, Egypt. The panel dated from 1500 BCE clearly depicts
siphons being used to extract wine from larger storage jars.1

by Nokes6,7 who in 1948, using a relatively crude apparatus by

todays standard, evacuated a glass siphon charged with a variety
of liquids available at that time. Although the experiment
appeared to be successful, some critique can be found with
regard to the partial pressures reached and the occasional failure
of the siphon process caused by bubble formation. To fully
resolve this issue it would seem that a modern recreation of the
original vacuum experiment performed by Nokes could provide
conclusive evidence as to the role of atmospheric pressure in the
siphon process.

EARLY EVIDENCE FOR ALTERNATE EXPLANATIONS

Evidence to support the view that atmospheric pressure is not
wholly responsible for the siphon process was rst presented
Copyright r 2011 American Chemical Society and
Division of Chemical Education, Inc.

Published: September 08, 2011

1547

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed2001818 | J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 15471550

Journal of Chemical Education

ARTICLE

OVERVIEW OF A MODERN EXPERIMENT

Downloaded by UNIV NACIONAL AUTONOMA MEXICO on September 3, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org

Publication Date (Web): September 8, 2011 | doi: 10.1021/ed2001818

Liquid

To arrange a siphon in a vacuum poses a number of unique

challenges, not least of which is that liquids are not typically well
suited to vacuum conditions. Not only do most liquids evaporate
completely under moderate vacuum pressures, but a considerable
time must also be spent removing all dissolved gases and volatile
compounds that can evolve during the siphoning process. It is this
second point that causes the most signicant problems when
considering the vacuum siphon. As rst reported by Nokes6 in his
vacuum siphon experiments, the major factors in breaking the
siphon ow were gases dissolved in the liquid and adsorbed on the
tube walls, mechanical shock, and turbulent ow. The choice of
liquids is of critical importance when attempting the vacuum
siphon. Early experiments were reported to have used water,
dibutyl phthalate, and mercury; all of which suer from distinct
drawbacks. Although mercury would seem to provide the ideal
candidate for such an experiment today, global restrictions based
upon its relative toxicity would most likely prohibit the current
use in vacuum experiments. Furthermore although mercury
exhibits an extremely low vapor pressure ( 2 Pa at 298 K), this
would create a localized pressure gradient above the liquid
surface; thus, in a permanently pumped high-vacuum environment, the pumps would be continuously removing mercury
leading to the steadily depletion of the liquid reservoirs. Consequently to eectively minimize any eects of vapor above the
surface of the liquid, there should be near to zero vapor pressure at
the liquid surface. A more suitable choice of liquid to use in highvacuum experiments is now available in the form of ionic liquids.
Ionic liquids (ILs) have been a source of fascination to chemists,
nding application both as reaction media, advanced materials, and
engineering uids.9 These liquids are, in general, bulky organicbased salts having melting points below room temperature.
Because they are composed entirely of ions, ionic liquids have
an almost zero vapor pressure and consequently do not evaporate
even under vacuum. Although it can no longer be stated that ILs
are involatile,10
12 aprotic dialkyl-imidazolium-based ILs can be
studied under high-vacuum conditions (10
4
10
7 Pa) almost
indenitely with negligible gravimetric losses. One of the key
strengths oered by ILs, in terms of application, is the exibility
oered by the large number of potential ion pairings that
may be employed in the preparation of designer liquids with
a specic combination of physico
chemical properties. Bis(triuoromethanesulfonyl)imide, [Tf2N]
, based ILs, are particularly hydrophobic in nature, low melting, and of low enough
viscosity to function in a typical siphon system.
Setup

To operate as a siphon, the liquid must ow from a raised

reservoir to a lower level, and it must also ow uphill above
the level in the higher reservoir. In most representations of the
siphon, the tube connecting the two reservoirs is an inverted U
tube with the higher of the two legs originating below the surface
of the raised reservoir and the lower leg extending above or into
the lower reservoir. In this arrangement, a signicant problem is
encountered when degassing liquids while in the tube or when
running the siphon at low partial pressure. For the ow of liquid
in a siphon to be continuous, the tube must be free of all bubbles.6
However, when operating under reduced pressures, if the liquid
is not suciently degassed, a signicant volume of gas can evolve
in the liquid and these gas bubbles will make their way toward the
top of the tube, due to buoyancy, causing discontinuities in the

Figure 2. Siphon tube set below the level of liquid for degassing in
vacuum, note that the ionic liquid has been stained using a colored dye to
aid visualization.

liquid and consequent breaches in intramolecular interactions

within the liquid. Once formed, such an arrangement also
precludes the removal of the bubbles without resetting of the
experiment.
By arranging two liquid reservoirs at either end of a exible
siphon tube, such that a constant uid level may be maintained
(in principle identical to an inverted, single open-leg U tube),
many of the previously stated problems can be overcome (Figure 2).
In particular, signicantly improved vacuum partial pressures,
well below those previously attained in a xed, single open-leg U
tube-based siphon, can be achieved. Furthermore by connecting
the tube to the base of the reservoir, during decompression the
connecting tube may be set below the level of the outlets thus
allowing bubbles to ow out through the bulk liquid in the
reservoirs and into the vacuum chamber. If one considers the
volume of liquid necessary to demonstrate such a siphon, to fully
degas a suciently large volume of liquid would typically take
between 24 and 48 h. Using the constant level design, the experiment may be repeated ad innitum oering a clear advantage
over the single-ow variety.
Once the experimental setup is successfully degassed, the
connecting tube is raised to a level above both reservoir outlets
(Figure 3). The liquid ow is then achieved by raising the height
of one reservoir, with respect to the other, in a manner similar to
that employed by traditional balance. Once a height dierential
occurs, the liquid will ow from the higher to the lower reservoir
thus maintaining an equilibrium level between the two reservoirs.
If during the process of siphoning a bubble a discontinuity
occurs, the experiment can be simply reset by lowering the
connecting tube below the level of the ends whereby any bubbles
will escape and the liquids recombine.

EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
In the experiment setup (Figure 2), two 25 mL borosilicate
glass measuring cylinders were modied with the addition of tube
joints attached to the base of each column. The two reservoirs
were then connected using a length of suitable exible tube
(20 cm length, 7 mm i.d. polyvinyl chloride clear tube) passing
1548

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed2001818 |J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 15471550

Downloaded by UNIV NACIONAL AUTONOMA MEXICO on September 3, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org

Publication Date (Web): September 8, 2011 | doi: 10.1021/ed2001818

Journal of Chemical Education

ARTICLE

Figure 3. Siphon tube in raised position to illustrate an active siphon

between liquid reservoirs. Re-equilibration of the liquid levels in the two
reservoirs was rapid (t < 3 min).14

Figure 4. Molecular cohesion broken, and thus no liquid is able to ow

between the reservoirs when the tube is raised. No capillary action can be
seen in the siphon tube.

through a metal ring at the midpoint between the two reservoirs.

By raising or lowering this metal ring, via external connections,
the siphon tube could be manually raised or lowered allowing all
bubbles to be removed from the connecting tube. Once the liquid
is fully degassed the metal ring is then raised to its maximum
vertical extent ready for the liquid to be siphoned between
reservoirs. The measuring cylinders were then mounted to a
retaining back plate in such a way as to allow relative movement
in the vertical direction via a tilting balance and lever arrangement. By moving the lever externally, connected through a
vacuum port, the in and out pivotal motion causes the two
measuring cylinders to move up and down creating a height
dierential of 4 cm between the reservoirs. The maximum height
of the tube above the liquid surface in the reservoirs was
measured to be 5 cm when at equilibrium.
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium bis(triuoromethanesulfonyl)imide, [C4C1Im][Tf2N], stained by the addition of an intensely
colored porphyrin-based dye (10 mg) to aid visualization,13 was
added to the measuring cylinders and connecting tube (total
volume 20 mL). The liquid was then evacuated to a pressure
of better than 1  10
1 Pa for a period of 24 h. During this time
the dissolved gases were removed from the liquid by continually
owing the liquid from one reservoir to another, while the
connecting tube was held below the reservoir level. Once fully
degassed, a turbo molecular pump was used to reduce the
chamber pressure to lower than 5  10
4 Pa over a period of
48 h to purge the liquid of the volatile contaminants. Then the
connecting tube between the measuring cylinders was raised to
its maximum vertical height above the surface of the liquid in the
two reservoirs. As no bubbles or breaks in the liquid occurred
within the connecting tube, the relative heights of the measuring
cylinders were then adjusted causing the liquid to ow through
the tube from the higher to lower of the two reservoirs (Figure 3).

surface of the liquid is assumed to be zero, within the limits of the

kinetic theory of gases under high-vacuum conditions, then no
upward force can be exerted on the liquid from the reservoir to
lift the liquid to the maximum height of the siphon tube. This was
tested by allowing the molecular cohesion of the liquid to be
broken in the connecting tube between reservoirs. Even when
each reservoir was raised to its maximum height (Figure 4) no
liquid was able to reach the highest point in the tube. It was also
apparent from observations of the meniscus that there is no
signicant adhesion of the liquid to the tube walls, thus discounting any capillary eects in the connecting siphon tube. Therefore,
it can be conclusively stated that the eect of atmospheric
pressure can now be discounted as a contributing factor in the
ow of liquid between the levels for this particular case of vacuum
siphon.
To explore the nature of the force at the highest point of the
tube, the case where both reservoirs are at equilibrium and no
liquid is owing is examined. Bernoullis principle15 is applied
from the surface of the higher reservoir (point A) to the highest
part of the tube (point B), with reference to the schematic shown
in Figure 5. For the static case where the tube is above the level of
the reservoir but no liquid ows between them, that is, when the
level is at equilibrium, the following equation is obtained

DISCUSSION
It can be seen that for the liquid to ow between the two
reservoirs it must travel above the level of the raised reservoir
clearly demonstrating the siphon action. If the pressure at the

A 2
B 2
FghA PA F
FghB PB
2
2

where F is the density of liquid, v is the liquid velocity, g the force

of gravity, and h the height of the liquid at that point. Assuming
that hA is the surface equilibrium level of the liquid and PA is the
vacuum chamber pressure, the left-hand side of the equation
is approximately equal to zero giving the surprising result that
PB
FghB. This result implies that the pressure at the top of
the tube is negative. Therefore to maintain a siphon in a vacuum
there needs to be a cohesive force that pulls the liquid up from
one reservoir before owing down into the other. This eect can
be seen to happen when the higher of the reservoirs empties
below the level of the tube outlets and the liquid is drawn up and
over into the lower measuring cylinder. By using this static model
1549

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed2001818 |J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 15471550

Downloaded by UNIV NACIONAL AUTONOMA MEXICO on September 3, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org

Publication Date (Web): September 8, 2011 | doi: 10.1021/ed2001818

Journal of Chemical Education

ARTICLE

196201. (c) Dzyuba, S. V.; Kollar, K. D.; Sabnis, S. S. J. Chem. Educ.

2010, 86, 856858.
(10) Armstrong, J. P.; Hurst, C.; Jones, R. G.; Licence, P.; Lovelock,
K. R. J.; Satterley, C. J.; Villar-Garcia, I. J. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2007,
9, 982.
(11) Earle, M. J.; Esperanc-a, J. M. S. S.; Gilea, M. A.; Lopes, J. N. C.;
Rebelo, L. P. N.; Magee, J. W.; Seddon, K. R.; Widegren, J. A. Nature
2006, 439, 831.
(12) Taylor, A. W.; Lovelock, K. R. J.; Deyko, A.; Licence, P.; Jones,
R. G. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2010, 12, 1772.
(13) The porphyrin-based dye is 5,10,15,20-tetrakis(1-methyl-4pyridinio)porphyrin tetra(p-toluenesulfonate).
(14) The viscosity of the high vacuum (HV) pumped liquid is
estimated to be relatively close to that measured at atmospheric pressure
(50.1 mPa s
1); this measurement was made using an Anton-Paar AMVn
(falling ball viscometer).
(15) Ganci, S.; Yegorenkov, V. Eur. J. Phys. 2008, 29, 421.

Figure 5. Schematic diagram of the siphon system illustrating the

relative heights of the liquid meniscus within the reservoir and the
height of the siphon tube in both the raised and lower positions.

it is seen that the cohesive force between the molecules of the

liquid in the vacuum can be easily measured by raising the level
of the tube until the bonds break, at which point the liquid ows
back into each container.
Although this experimental setup is a special example of a
siphon, liquids with low or near-zero tensile strengths can be
easily demonstrated to function in siphons at a normal positive
pressure. It is therefore concluded that whereas cohesion does
have a part to play in most siphons, the underlying principle is
most readily explained in terms of gravity and hydrostatic
pressure dierential without regard to the mechanism of atmospheric pressure or cohesive force.

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author

*E-mail: ab582@leicester.ac.uk (A.L.B); peter.licence@nottingham.

ac.uk (P.L).

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We would like to thank the University of Nottingham and the
EPSRC (EP/D501229/1) for nancial support. P.L. acknowledges the EPSRC for the award of an Advanced Research
Fellowship (EP/D073014/1). We thank A. J. Stace FRS for
allowing us to carry out experiments using one of his vacuum
chambers.
REFERENCES
(1) Wilkinson, J. G. Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians;
John Murray: London, 1837.
(2) Hughes, S. W. Phys. Educ. 2010, 45, 162.
(3) Hughes, S. W. Phys. Educ. 2011, 46, 298.
(4) Ganci, S.; Yegorenkov, V. Eur. J. Phys. 2008, 29, 421.
(5) Minor, R. S. School Sci. Math. 1914, 14, 152.
(6) Nokes, M. C. School Sci. Rev. 1948, 29, 233.
(7) Nokes, M. C. Am. J. Phys. 1948, 16, 254.
(8) Potter, A.; Barnes, F. H. Phys. Educ. 1971, 6, 362.
(9) (a) Ionic Liquids in Synthesis, 2nd ed.; Wasserscheid, P., Welton,
T., Eds.; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, Germany, 2008. (b) Stark, A.; Ott, D.;
Kralisch, D.; Kreisel, G.; Ondruschka, B. J. Chem. Educ. 2010, 87,
1550

dx.doi.org/10.1021/ed2001818 |J. Chem. Educ. 2011, 88, 15471550