A Study on Novel Gas Atomization Device for Preparing Ultra Fine Metal Powder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On the basis of technologies of gas atomization, supersonic gas atomization, surface effect of electric charge and jet, we design a new-style device of two fluids atomization with the combination of solid atomization and electric field utilizing a LAVAL nozzle, a delivery tube of sectional type and the electrical field dispersion technique. The soldering tin of 63 A was atomized with the air, and the powder prepared was analyzed by optical granularity analyzer, nanometer magnetic particles and Zeta potential analyzer. The results show that the particle size with less than 8μm can reach 75%; the average particle size is 1.7612μm, and the first peak in the distribution curve is about 500 nm, which is an order of magnitude smaller than that the existing reported peak. The compound atomization device can refine the particle size of powers effectively, improve uniformity, yielding rate, and the purity of atomized powders and has a significant effect on atomizing, thus provides powerful supports for preparing ultra fine metal powders with high efficiency and low energy consumption and has a good prospect in application.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".