Determination of Fuel Droplet Evaporation Based on Multiple Thermocouple Sizes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fuel droplet evaporation is an important process in fuel spray such as in internal combustion engine and gas turbine. Experimental data of fuel droplet evaporation are important to the validation of heat and mass transfer models which in turn are used in fuel spray modeling. This paper presents experimental data of evaporating butanol and nheptane droplets under warm forced convection. The droplets were suspended by thermocouple fibres to also obtain fuel droplets temperature. Different thermocouple diameters were used to determine the mean evaporation rate without thermocouple fibres which is extrapolated by plotting the mean evaporation rate of the droplet as a function of the thermocouple diameter squared. By using thermocouple it is also possible to obtain the fuel droplet temperature history which shows, for butanol, that most of the evaporation process takes place at a constant droplet temperature. On the other hand, for a volatile substance such as n-heptane, the droplet temperature is characterized by a continuously transient change of droplet temperature. Finally, the results of a model based on the energy balance of the fuel droplet shows the repartition of the relative importance of convection, conduction and radiation for different thermocouple fibre diameters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".