MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023506320 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2015.81

Macro-size drop encapsulation

2015· article· en· W2023506320 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Maleki, Sarah Hormozi, A. Roustaei, I.A. Frigaard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicRheology and Fluid Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsHagen–Poiseuille equationMaterials scienceViscoplasticityCapillary actionLaminar flowPipe flowMicrofluidicsNanotechnologyFlow (mathematics)ThermodynamicsPhysicsTurbulenceComposite materialFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Viscoplastic fluids do not flow unless they are sufficiently stressed. This property can be exploited in order to produce novel flow features. One example of such flows is viscoplastically lubricated (VPL) flow, in which a viscoplastic fluid is used to stabilize the interface in a multi-layer flow, far beyond what might be expected for a typical viscous–viscous interface. Here we extend this idea by considering the encapsulation of droplets within a viscoplastic fluid, for the purpose of transportation, e.g. in pipelines. The main advantage of this method, compared to others that involve capillary forces is that significantly larger droplets may be stably encapsulated, governed by the length scale of the flow and yield stress of the encapsulating fluid. We explore this set-up both analytically and computationally. We show that sufficiently small droplets are held in the unyielded plug of a Poiseuille flow (pipe or plane channel). As the length or radius of the droplets increases, the carrier fluid eventually yields, potentially breaking the encapsulation. We study this process of breaking and give estimates for the limiting size of droplets that can be encapsulated.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations19
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicRheology and Fluid Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207