The Aerodynamic Behavior of Fibers in a Linear Shear Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lung deposition behavior for straight versus curved aerosol fibers is known to be different based on existing experimental data. However, our understanding of actual fiber dynamics in the respiratory system remains far from being complete. In particular, it is not clear how fiber shape influences particle motion in the lungs. This article presents the results of direct numerical simulations in a linear shear flow of the rotational dynamics of high aspect ratio fibers with complex shapes such as elliptic rods, torus segments, and helices. Our findings show that as expected the rotational behavior of complex fibers is different from that observed for straight symmetrical particles. In particular, we observe secondary rotation for our particles, which is perpendicular to the shear plane (a plane with the unit normal parallel to the local vorticity) as well as more frequent flipping (for helical particles) than observed for straight fibers with the same lengths and diameters. In view of our results, it can be suggested that respiratory tract deposition for particles with complex shapes will exhibit enhanced interception compared with the deposition of particles with simpler shapes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".