MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082029509 · doi:10.1615/atomizspr.v16.i6.50

MODELING DROPLET SIZE DISTRIBUTION NEAR A NOZZLE OUTLET IN AN ICING WIND TUNNEL

2006· article· en· W2082029509 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAtomization and Sprays · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNozzleWind tunnelIcingRange (aeronautics)Environmental scienceAerosolMeteorologyMechanicsAerospace engineeringPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The median volume diameter (MVD) and the droplet size distribution (DSD) in an aerosol cloud under icing conditions are investigated. The procedure involves experimental observation of aerosol size distributions in an icing wind tunnel, computing the MVD by applying an empirical formula, and matching a distribution function to experimental data so as to estimate the DSD. Some of the nozzle dynamic parameters (NDPs), i.e., nozzle water and air pressure, are varied throughout the experiments, and droplet diameter is measured near the nozzle outlet. A new empirical formula is proposed that expresses the relationship between the MVD and the NDPs and, compared to previous studies, provides wind tunnel operators with a more convenient technique to estimate the MVD in the operational range of the selected nozzles. Moreover, the least squares fitting technique is used to find the best-fitting distribution function among published empirical relationships intended to model the DSD for nozzle-generated aerosol. The MVD and DSD obtained by this procedure, together with the NDPs and the thermodynamic parameters, may be used to model and control two-phase flows in icing wind tunnels.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · 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