In the Classroom

edited by
JCE DigiDemos: Tested Demonstrations Ed Vitz
Kutztown University
Kutztown, PA 19530

The Ultrasonic Soda Fountain: A Dramatic Demonstration

of Gas Solubility in Aqueous Solutions
submitted by: John E. Baur*
Department of Chemistry, Illinois State University, Normal, IL 61790-4160; *jebaur@ilstu.edu

Melinda B. Baur
Department of Chemistry, Illinois Wesleyan University, Bloomington, IL 61702-2900

checked by: David A. Franz

Department of Chemistry, Lycoming College, Williamsport, PA 17701

The solubility of gases in liquids is a fundamental con-

cept that is explored in classrooms from grade school through
college. Common demonstrations of gas solubility range from
comparisons of carbonation in warm versus cold beverages
at the primary school level through measurements of Henry’s
law constants in the undergraduate laboratory (1, 2). We de-
scribe a simple yet dramatic demonstration suitable for in-
troducing the concept of gas solubility by exposing a
carbonated beverage (uncapped) to ultrasonic energy in a
common laboratory ultrasonic cleaner. As shown in Figure
1, the sudden degassing of the solution through the narrow
bottle top produces a dramatic, foaming fountain that can
reach a height of several meters. For advanced level classes,
the demonstration might be used to introduce the dynamic
aspect of gas solubility in liquids and nucleation in liquids
supersaturated with gas.
Henry’s law describes the relationship between the con-
centration of a gas dissolved in a solvent, [X], and the partial
pressure of the gas, pX,
[X] = KX pX
where KX, the Henry’s law constant, is dependent on the
chemical identity of the solute and solvent and on the tem-
perature of the solution. After bottling, the headspace of a
soda is comprised primarily of CO2 at a pressure of about 4
atm (i.e., pCO2 = 4 atm) (3). Earth’s atmosphere has a much
lower CO2 partial pressure ( pCO2 = 3.7 × 10᎑4 atm) (4).
Therefore, Henry’s law predicts that the concentration of
aqueous CO2 should decrease dramatically after exposing the
beverage to the atmosphere. Fortunately, this equilibrium is
established slowly, and we can thus enjoy carbonated bever-
ages for some time after opening the container.
By exposing a carbonated beverage to ultrasonic energy,
the rate of CO2 loss is greatly accelerated and this equilib-
rium with the atmosphere is achieved much more rapidly. A
spectacular fountain of foam results from the large volume
of CO2 ejected through the narrow opening at the top of
the bottle. Although the height of this fountain depends upon
several parameters, we routinely achieve heights of 1–2 meters Figure 1. The ultrasonic soda fountain: (A) warm (left) versus cold
with a 2-L bottle of soda and greater than 3 meters with a (5 °C) diet 2-L sodas, (B) regular (left) versus diet sodas, (C) newly
single-serving bottle having a reduced size opening. Under opened (left) versus flat diet sodas, and (D) 24-oz (710-mL) diet
optimal conditions, more than half of the beverage volume soda with reduced size opening (see text). Except for the cold soda
is ejected within 5–10 seconds. in panel A, the temperature of all sodas was 24 °C.

www.JCE.DivCHED.org • Vol. 83 No. 4 April 2006 • Journal of Chemical Education 577

 In the Classroom
Figure 2. Enclosed operation of the ultrasonic soda fountain for sim-
pler cleanup using (A, B) 5-gallon (19-L) water cooler bottle or (C,
D) vented 2-L soda bottle. The fountain is shown just after energiz-
ing the ultrasound (A, C) and during the maximum intensity (B, D).
Figure 3. A close-up view of the connector for the water bottle cooler.
578 Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 83 No. 4 April 2006
Procedure
The demonstration should be performed outdoors or in
a room with a high ceiling and provisions for containing a
large spill. Liquid can splatter several meters from the bottle,
and therefore spectators should be kept at a safe distance. We
prefer to use a colorless diet soda, as problems with staining
and sticky residue are avoided. If single-serving bottles are
used, they are fitted with a #3 rubber stopper into which a
hole has been drilled so that a 4-cm piece of a plastic drink-
ing straw can be held tightly. The straw is used to achieve a
measure of directional control of the fountain.
Before attempting the demonstration, a waterproof cover
for the ultrasonic cleaner should be made. We cut a hole the
size of the cleaner’s bath in an absorbent, plastic-lined labo-
ratory shelf paper. Sufficient water is added to the cleaner so
that when the beverage container is placed in the bath the
water reaches the operating level. After the beverage cap is
removed, the ultrasound can be energized.
We have also used two versions of the demonstration
that require less cleanup. While somewhat less dramatic, they
are more appropriate for indoor demonstrations in smaller
classrooms. In the first, an empty 5-gallon (19-L) water cooler
bottle is used to contain the fountain (Figures 2A and B). To
join the soda bottle to the larger container we used a Foun-
tain Connection (Yeany Educational Products, Palmyra, PA),
Tygon tubing, and a #10 rubber stopper configured as shown
in Figure 3. Although we allowed soda exiting the vent to
drip back into the bath, a drain tube could also be attached.
The second version is an even simpler method of con-
tainment suitable for smaller audiences. For this demonstra-
tion, an empty 2-L bottle with small vent holes is joined to a
single-serving soda (Figure 2C and D). A “Tornado Tube”
(Burnham Associates, Salem, MA) commonly used to join
two 2-L bottles for a vortex demonstration makes a simple
coupler. Although the ejection of a small volume of foam
from the vent holes is unavoidable, we found that placing
the holes on the side near the top of the inverted 2-L recep-
tacle minimizes splatter.
The effect of a number of experimental parameters on
the fountain can be investigated:
• Temperature: The height of the fountain is greater
for room temperature beverages than for chilled
beverages (Figure 1A).
• Presence of other solutes: Diet sodas generally pro-
duce higher fountains than sodas sweetened with
sugars (Figure 1B).
• Aqueous CO2 concentration: A beverage that has
been opened for a period of time will produce a
smaller fountain than a freshly opened beverage
(Figure 1C).
With the exception of seltzer water and club soda, all car-
bonated beverages we exposed to the ultrasonic energy pro-
duced a fountain. Table 1 shows the fountain height obtained
with single-serving containers of different sodas using the re-
stricted opening. Maximum effect was achieved with room
temperature Diet Coke.
• www.JCE.DivCHED.org
 In the Classroom

Hazards a higher fountain is produced when the rate of bubble for-

mation increases relative to the rate of bubble collapse. We
To avoid electrical shock hazards, the electronics and can make some generalizations about the data in Table 1 based
power cable of the ultrasonic cleaner must be covered with a upon the effect solution properties have on the rate of bubble
waterproof material. Further, the experiment should only be formation and collapse. The formation of cavities in solu-
attempted with the ultrasonic cleaner plugged into a ground- tion by ultrasound is favored in solvents with low viscosity,
fault interrupt (GFI) outlet. If no such outlet is available, an low surface tension, and high vapor pressure (8). Compared
extension cord with an integrated GFI circuit should be ob- to pure water, a solution containing 10% w兾w sucrose (the
tained from a hardware store. approximate concentration of sugars in a regular soda) has a
significantly higher viscosity (1.336 versus 1.002 cP at 20
Discussion ⬚C ; ref 9), a slightly higher surface tension (72.50 versus
71.97 mN兾m at 25 ⬚C; ref 10), and a lower vapor pressure.
When discussing the results of this demonstration, one These data are consistent with a diet soda producing a higher
should be careful to emphasize that the fountain results from
kinetic effects. All carbonated beverages are supersaturated with
CO2 upon opening, so loss of the gas is thermodynamically Table 1. Fountain Heights Obtained
favored. At 25 ⬚C, a soda contains about 3 L of CO2 per liter with Various Carbonated Beverages
of solution just after opening.1 If the container remains un- Height/
disturbed, the carbon dioxide loss is slow and occurs via two Beverage Size T/°C Comments
m
processes: diffusion through the surface layer and bubble for- Golden Crown 1L 5 — No fountain
mation. Of these, the former is slow because of the relatively Seltzer Water
low area of soda exposed to the atmosphere. Bubble formation, Golden Crown 1L 5 — No fountain
therefore, is the predominant mechanism for CO2 loss, and Soda Water
the rate at which equilibrium is reestablished depends upon Golden Crown 1L 5 — Foamed over
the rate of bubble formation. Because of the high degree of Tonic Water side of
interfacial free energy associated with very small bubbles, spon- unrestricted
taneous formation of bubbles is energetically unfavorable in opening
carbonated beverages (5, 6). Instead, bubbles rise from a few Harp Lager (Beer) 350 mL 5 <1 Foamy mess!
discrete nucleation sites at which this interfacial energy bar- Coca-Cola 470 mL 5 2.3
rier is overcome. In champagne, it has been shown that nucle- 21 3.7
ation occurs at impurities on the container wall (6, 7). Diet Coke 470 mL 5 3.9 Vigorous;
Shaking or dropping a carbonated beverage produces a 21 > 4.5 stopper
spray of foam when the container is opened because a num- ejected in
ber of nucleation sites are formed by the mechanical agita- each case
tion of the solution. Likewise, ultrasound produces a spray Dr. Pepper 710 mL 5 3.2
of foam because of increased nucleation. This was demon- 21 3.8
strated by two simple experiments. First, when a closed bottle Diet Dr. Pepper 710 mL 5 2.5
of soda was exposed to ultrasound there was no visible effect 21 3.9
on the beverage. However, when the bottle was subsequently Mountain Dew 710 mL 5 0.9
opened, a spray of foam qualitatively comparable in inten- 21 2.5
sity to a shaken bottle of soda resulted. In the second experi- Diet Mountain Dew 710 mL 5 1.5
ment, a small volume of soda was placed in a beaker and 21 3.3
closely observed during exposure to ultrasound. As shown in Diet Pepsi 710 mL 5 3.0
Figure 4, violent evolution of CO2 occurs primarily at the 21 3.9
bottom and sides of the container. Before exposure to the Sierra Mist 710 mL 5 2.3
ultrasound few bubbles are visible (Figure 4A), a large cas- 21 2.8
cade of bubbles appears at the beaker surface shortly after Diet Sierra Mist 710 mL 5 3.5
initiating the ultrasonic energy (Figures 4B and C), and 21 3.8
bubbles remaining at some nucleation sites are still visible NOTE: Results are the average of three replicates. Except where noted,
a reduced-size opening was used.
just after the termination of the ultrasound (Figure 4D). This
greatly increased nucleation probably results from both in-
tense agitation (which forms nucleation sites in a manner
similar to shaking) and from cavitation (the formation of very
small bubbles during the low pressure portion of the ultra-
sonic wave) (8). Interestingly, the bubbles produced in the
ultrasound are much smaller than the bubbles formed in the
undisturbed solution.
Table 1 shows that fountain height increases with tem- Figure 4. Time-lapse images of Diet Sierra Mist in the ultrasonic
perature for a given soda and that diet sodas produce higher cleaner: (A) Initial solution, (B) ~100 ms after energizing the ultra-
fountains than the sugar-sweetened versions. A number of sound, (C) ~250 ms after energizing the ultrasound, and (D) after
effects probably combine to give these results, but ultimately termination of the ultrasound and collapse of the foam.

www.JCE.DivCHED.org • Vol. 83 No. 4 April 2006 • Journal of Chemical Education 579

 In the Classroom

rate of bubble formation and thus a higher fountain. The The pH values of the carbonated beverages used were well
origin of the temperature effect on the fountain is not below the combined pKa1 (6.35), and therefore nearly all car-
straightforward. Solution properties favor cavity formation bon dioxide is present as CO2(aq). In fact, the solution that
at higher temperatures (viscosity and surface tension decrease remains in the container still has CO2(aq) as the predomi-
and vapor pressure increases with temperature), and the rate nant form, as the pH was nearly the same as in the newly-
of bubble growth also increases with temperature (6). These opened beverage (on average the pH increased 0.05 ± 0.07
effects must combine to produce a higher rate of degassing units). Additionally, the solution is still supersaturated with
at elevated temperatures and thus generate a higher fountain. CO2, as the carbonation is still perceptible by sensation on
Seltzer water and soda water produce no fountain, prob- tongue (though noticeably diminished) and bubbles continue
ably because they contain no ingredients that stabilize the to form in the remaining solution (but at a much lower rate).
bubbles. While the rate of bubble formation in these bever- This demonstration vividly illustrates the large volume
ages greatly increases in the ultrasound, much larger bubbles of dissolved CO2 contained in an ordinary soda. It can also
are produced, indicating high rate of coalescence. However, be an effective tool for stimulating discussions of gas solubil-
if a small quantity of surfactant is added (1 drop of common ity, solution properties, nucleation, and kinetics.
dishwashing detergent in 1 L of the beverage will suffice),
both seltzer water and soda water produce fountains. Beer, Acknowledgments
which has a low rate of bubble formation but high concen-
trations of surfactants that stabilize the foam (7, 11), pro- The authors wish to thank Claire and Ben Baur for ex-
duces a fountain. These observations further demonstrate the perimental assistance and Otis Rothenberger and James Webb
importance of the rates of bubble formation and collapse. for their valuable comments on the manuscript. We also ac-
Finally, it should be recognized that CO2 does not ide- knowledge Robert Turner for helpful discussions.
ally follow Henry’s law because it undergoes a chemical reac-
tion with the solvent. After dissolution, which is governed Note
by Henry’s law:
1. This calculation ignores the effect of other solutes on the
CO2(g) CO2(aq) CO2 solubility and also assume that only CO2 is in the headspace.
K CO2 = 3.4 × 10−2mol L−1atm−1 (1)
Literature Cited
the carbon dioxide can react with water to form carbonic acid:
1. Levy, J. B.; Hornack, F. M.; Levy, M. A. J. Chem. Educ. 1987,
CO2(aq) + H2O H2CO3 64, 260–261.
−3 (2) 2. Halpern, A. M. Experimental Physical Chemistry: A Laboratory
K = 1.7 × 10
Textbook, 2nd ed.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ,
However, because the equilibrium constant is small, CO2(aq) 1997.
is the predominate species. The carbonic acid can dissociate 3. Silberberg, M. S. Chemistry, The Molecular Nature of Matter
to form bicarbonate and carbonate according to the follow- and Change, 2nd ed.; McGraw Hill: Boston, MA, 2000.
ing reactions: 4. Spiro, T. G.; Stigliani, W. M. Chemistry of the Environment,
+ − 2nd ed.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2003.
H2CO3(aq) + H2O H3O + HCO3 5. Deamer, D. W.; Selinger, B. K. J. Chem. Educ. 1988, 65, 518.
−4 (3) 6. Liger-Belair, G.; Vignes-Adler, M.; Voisin, C.; Robillard, B.;
Ka1 = 2.7 × 10
Jeandet, P. Langmuir 2002, 18, 1294–1301.
− + 2− 7. Liger-Belair, G. Sci. Am. 2003, 288, 80–85.
HCO3 + H2O H3O + CO3
−11 (4) 8. Thompson, L. H.; Doraiswamy, L. K. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
Ka2 = 4.69 × 10 1999, 38, 1215–1249.
9. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 85th ed.; Lide, D.
Reactions 2 and 3 are commonly combined into a single ex- R., Ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2004; p 8-82.
pression for Ka1: 10. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 63rd ed.; Weast, R.
C., Astle, M. J., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1982; pp
H3O + HCO3−
+
CO2(aq) + 2H2O
(5) F-34–F-35.
−7
Ka1 = 4.45 × 10 11. Shafer, N. E.; Zare, R. N. Phys. Today 1991, 44, 48–52.

580 Journal of Chemical Education • Vol. 83 No. 4 April 2006 • www.JCE.DivCHED.org