Experimental and Analytical Study of the Pressure Drop Across a Double-Outlet Vortex Chamber
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents experimental and analytical results concerning the pressure drop and the core size in vortex chambers. The new formulation is based on the conservation of mass and energy integral equations and takes into account the presence of two outlet ports. The diminishing vortex strength is introduced through the vortex decay factor. The influence of vortex chamber geometry, such as diameter ratio, aspect ratio, and Reynolds number, on the flow field have been examined and compared with the present experimental data. It is shown that the presence of the swirl velocity component makes the pressure drop across a vortex chamber significantly different than the familiar unidirectional pipe flow. When the chamber length is increased, the vortex diminishes under the action of friction, producing a weaker centrifugal force which leads to a further pressure drop. It is revealed that by increasing the Reynolds number, the cores expand resulting into a larger pressure coefficient. For a double-outlet chamber where the flow is divided into two streams, the last parameter is found to be less than that of a single-outlet.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".