MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014856686 · doi:10.1063/1.870356

Fixed boundary dual liquid bridges in zero gravity

2000· article· en· W2014856686 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Lowry

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsRADIUSCylinderMechanicsBoundary (topology)Volume (thermodynamics)GeometryThermodynamicsMathematical analysisMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The equilibria and stability of fixed contact line dual liquid bridges are considered. The dual liquid bridges considered consist of two fixed length single bridges joined by an open channel so that both bridges are in pressure equilibrium. The system is simplified by requiring all bounds to be of equal radius, and also by neglecting gravity or other applied forces. The dual liquid bridge is found to be generally more stable than a single bridge of equal length in the fixed pressure case, but less stable in the fixed volume case. The maximum length of dual liquid bridge in the fixed pressure case is double that for a single bridge, 7.4547 times the radius. In the fixed volume case, a rupture of the stability envelope leads to ranges of boundary conditions for which there are no stable dual liquid bridges of any volume. One exception to fixed volume destabilization is the cylindrical dual bridge. The maximum length attainable for a cylinder is 8.9868 times the radius, which not coincidentally is also the secondary stability limit for a single fixed volume cylinder (beyond the classical limit of 2π times the radius). The results suggest that any application which pumps fluid through a series of cylindrical liquid bridges would be most favorable using a dual liquid bridge with pressure-constrained pumping.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFrench-language works237,207