MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1511774911 · doi:10.7494/cmms.2011.1.0315

Computer modeling of pneumatic formation of superthin fibres

2011· article· en· W1511774911 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leszek Jarecki, Sławomir Błoński, A. Zachara, Anna Blim

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Methods in Materials Science. · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicTextile materials and evaluations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Materials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dynamics of a novel pneumatic process of superthin fibres formation from polymer melts in supersonic air jets in the Laval nozzle is studied using computer simulation. The approach bases on the mathematical k- models of air flow in the nozzle and air drawing of polymer filaments in the coaxial air jet. The aerodynamic fields can be considered as undisturbed by presence of a single row of thin polymer filaments and predetermined air conditions are used in the modeling. The air fields are simulated for several values of the air compressions in the nozzle inlet and two nozzle geometries. Driving force of the Laval nozzle process results from the air drag forces acting onto the filament surface. Mathematical model of stationary melt spinning in single-, thin-filament approximation is applied with the effects of non-linear viscoelasticity of the polymer melt accounted for. The model allows also to discuss non-linear stress-optical relationship reflecting online molecular orientation, as well as online crystallization of the polymer filament if it occurs. Negative rheological extra-pressure in the air-drawn filament is predicted, as resulting from non-linear viscoelasticity of the polymer melt subjected to high elongation rates. The negative extra-pressure could lead to cavitation and longitudinal burst splitting of each filament into a high number of superthin sub-filaments. A hypothetical mean diameter of the sub-filaments is estimated from an energetic criterion. Example computations of the dynamic profiles of air drawing and discussion concern isotactic polypropylene (iPP) subjected to the Laval nozzle process.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Methods in Materials Science.Same topicTextile materials and evaluationsFrench-language works237,207