Studies of wind drift of charged particles in a quasi greenhouse setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In some very large greenhouses, the spraying of insecticides is achieved by releasing uncharged fine aerosols in the air being circulated by fans. This paper presents some qualitative preliminary studies of the drift of charged aerosols. The downwind reach was evaluated by the amounts of deposits at various distances. The tests were carried out in the Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory with real potted plants at wind speeds of 1.6 m/s and 2.5 m/s. Both charged and uncharged deposits up to 9 m downwind were estimated against the visual standards of high and low deposits. It was found that the undersurfaces of leaves were reached much more often and with greater intensify by the charged aerosol. The aerosols were observed to travel further downstream at the higher speed and considerably fewer particles were captured from the uncharged spray over the entire observing array. At 2.5 m/s wind speed, both the uncharged and charged aerosols showed substantial deposits on the tops of the leaves up to a 6 m distance. At larger distances, up to 9 m, only the charged aerosol droplets gave adequate deposits. A possible explanation is that the charged aerosol cloud, which is continually attracted to the ground by its image force, reaches lower heights in the air stream whereas the uncharged aerosols are convected at higher heights.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".