An Experimental Study of Liquid Jets Interacting with Cross Airflows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The primary break‐up of liquid jets in cross flows has been studied experimentally. An open‐circuit wind tunnel was employed in which the airflow was generated by a centrifugal fan. The test section, positioned 3 m downstream of the fan, was made of clear acrylic resin to allow optical access and visualization. The working liquid used in the present experiment was an aero‐engine lubrication oil, which was injected perpendicularly into the air flow, via a nozzle placed in the top wall of the test‐section. The study of the primary break‐up mechanisms of the jet involved three parameters, the oil viscosity, and the jet and air cross flow velocities, which were varied independently. Two different break‐up regimes were observed and identified; arcade break‐up and bag break‐up. These were separated by a transition zone. Transverse and longitudinal (or streamwise) penetrations of the jet before the liquid breakup were also measured. The correlation proposed by Wu et al. to predict the jet transverse penetration before the break‐up of the liquid, as a function of the liquid/airflow momentum‐flux ratio, was found to be applicable only to liquids with low viscosity. An empirical extension to this equation has been produced.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".