The charging level of a ligament-droplet system atomized in a uniform electric field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a numerical algorithm has been formulated for calculating the charge magnitude on a spherical droplet created by break-up of a cylindrical ligament in an external electric field. The algorithm is based on the Finite Element Method and it determines the droplet charge as a function of the droplet radius and ligament length. It has been found that the droplet charge is a function of particle radius to some exponent, which is equal to 2 when the droplet is in direct contact with the atomizer and decreases dramatically to approach 1.1, as the ligament length increases. The effect of the ligament radius on the charging level has been found to be significant and increases with the ligament length. It was determined that the charging level is affected by the presence of adjacent ligaments and previously ejected droplets. To investigate the dynamics of the droplet atomization, the Navier-Stokes equations, describing the fluid motion, as well as the level-set equation for tracking the interfaces between the air and liquid have been solved. A comparison between the charging level of the dynamically formed droplets and an assumed spherical one has been presented. It has been found that the predicted charging level of the spherical droplet is lower than the one of the actual shape in a range of 15-26%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".