Direct Numerical Simulations of Three-Layer Viscosity-Stratified Flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two-dimensional simulations of flow instability at the interface of a three-layer, density-matched, viscosity-stratified Poiseuille flow are performed using a front-tracking/finite difference method. This is an extension of the study for the stability of two-layer viscosity-stratified flow of Cao et al., Int. J. Multiphase Flow, 30, 1485-1508 (2004). We present results for large-amplitude non-linear evolution of the interface for varying viscosity ratio m, Weber number We, and phase difference between the perturbations of the two interfaces. Strong non-linear behaviour is observed for relatively large initial perturbation amplitude. The higher viscosity fluid is drawn out as a finger that penetrates into the lower viscosity layer. The finger originates at the crest of the perturbation at the interface. The simulated interface shape compares well with previously reported experiments. Increasing interfacial tension retards the growth rate of the interface as expected, whereas increasing the viscosity ratio enhances it. The sinuous instability appears to evolve faster than the varicose one. For certain flow parameters the high-viscosity finger displays a bulbous tip, which is also seen in our previously conducted experiments and two-layer results, although it is less pronounced. The low-viscosity intruding finger does not display this curious bulbous tip. Drop formation is precluded by the two-dimensional nature of the calculations.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".